If what is said in the article is correct, I don't see what was wrong with "him tweeting". He sent messages via a prison-approved method to someone outside who tweeted on his behalf.
Do prisoners automatically retain the right to access online services? No. But why should they be denied the right to ask people in the outside world to use these services (which are completely legal - it's not like he was asking them to do anything dodgy) on his behalf?
Just because the title makes it sound like he sneakily found a way around the system, this really isn't a big deal, he didn't break any rules, he didn't even find any loopholes, he just did what seems to be perfectly allowed. (Unless the article is neglecting to mention why it would not be allowed.)
Weev is a massive tool, but (if his lawyer's speculation is correct) why do you feel that asking someone to post a tweet on your account warrants solitary confinement? What makes it worse than writing a letter to a newspaper, writing a book and having it published while in jail, or just speaking to someone and asking them to pass a message onto friends/family - all of which happen without outcry.
If it's prison-approved then it's true that stuff ending up on Twitter (which is how I'd phrase it rather than 'weev posting to Twitter') should not land him in solitary.
But that is weev's theory for why he landed in solitary; there may be alternative reasons (e.g. joking about killing himself, disruptive behavior with other inmates, etc.)
Sure, it's possible he's in solitary for killing 20 prison guards, but this article and these comments are on the theory that it's for tweeting, and the person I replied to suggested that this alone warranted solitary confinement.
Do prisoners automatically retain the right to access online services? No. But why should they be denied the right to ask people in the outside world to use these services (which are completely legal - it's not like he was asking them to do anything dodgy) on his behalf?
Just because the title makes it sound like he sneakily found a way around the system, this really isn't a big deal, he didn't break any rules, he didn't even find any loopholes, he just did what seems to be perfectly allowed. (Unless the article is neglecting to mention why it would not be allowed.)
Weev is a massive tool, but (if his lawyer's speculation is correct) why do you feel that asking someone to post a tweet on your account warrants solitary confinement? What makes it worse than writing a letter to a newspaper, writing a book and having it published while in jail, or just speaking to someone and asking them to pass a message onto friends/family - all of which happen without outcry.