clever reply to Pavel Durovs X post: 🇲🇩 About a ...

Prompt
clever reply to Pavel Durovs X post: 🇲🇩 About a year ago, while I was stuck in Paris, the French intelligence services reached out to me through an intermediary, asking me to help the Moldovan government censor certain Telegram channels ahead of the presidential elections in Moldova. After reviewing the channels flagged by French (and Moldovan) authorities, we identified a few that clearly violated our rules and removed them. The intermediary then informed me that, in exchange for this cooperation, French intelligence would “say good things” about me to the judge who had ordered my arrest in August last year. This was unacceptable on several levels. If the agency did in fact approach the judge — it constituted an attempt to interfere in the judicial process. If it did not, and merely claimed to have done so, then it was exploiting my legal situation in France to influence political developments in Eastern Europe — a pattern we have also observed in Romania 🇷🇴 Shortly thereafter, the Telegram team received a second list of so-called “problematic” Moldovan channels. Unlike the first, nearly all of these channels were legitimate and fully compliant with our rules. Their only commonality was that they voiced political positions disliked by the French and Moldovan governments. We refused to act on this request. Telegram is committed to freedom of speech and will not remove content for political reasons. I will continue to expose every attempt to pressure Telegram into censoring our platform. Stay tuned.
ChatGPTOpenAI
clever reply to Pavel Durovs X post: 🇲🇩 About a year ago, while I was stuck in Paris, the French intelligence services reached out to me through an intermediary, asking me to help the Moldovan government censor certain Telegram channels ahead of the presidential elections in Moldova. After reviewing the channels flagged by French (and Moldovan) authorities, we identified a few that clearly violated our rules and removed them. The intermediary then informed me that, in exchange for this cooperation, French intelligence would “say good things” about me to the judge who had ordered my arrest in August last year. This was unacceptable on several levels. If the agency did in fact approach the judge — it constituted an attempt to interfere in the judicial process. If it did not, and merely claimed to have done so, then it was exploiting my legal situation in France to influence political developments in Eastern Europe — a pattern we have also observed in Romania 🇷🇴 Shortly thereafter, the Telegram team received a second list of so-called “problematic” Moldovan channels. Unlike the first, nearly all of these channels were legitimate and fully compliant with our rules. Their only commonality was that they voiced political positions disliked by the French and Moldovan governments. We refused to act on this request. Telegram is committed to freedom of speech and will not remove content for political reasons. I will continue to expose every attempt to pressure Telegram into censoring our platform. Stay tuned.
A clever reply could be:

"Standing firm where it counts. When censorship knocks disguised as ‘cooperation,’ freedom answers with a locked door. Respect for your integrity, Pavel — proving that principled tech leadership isn’t just about innovation, but about safeguarding voices others want silenced. Onward, no compromises!"

17:16
GrokxAI
clever reply to Pavel Durovs X post: 🇲🇩 About a year ago, while I was stuck in Paris, the French intelligence services reached out to me through an intermediary, asking me to help the Moldovan government censor certain Telegram channels ahead of the presidential elections in Moldova. After reviewing the channels flagged by French (and Moldovan) authorities, we identified a few that clearly violated our rules and removed them. The intermediary then informed me that, in exchange for this cooperation, French intelligence would “say good things” about me to the judge who had ordered my arrest in August last year. This was unacceptable on several levels. If the agency did in fact approach the judge — it constituted an attempt to interfere in the judicial process. If it did not, and merely claimed to have done so, then it was exploiting my legal situation in France to influence political developments in Eastern Europe — a pattern we have also observed in Romania 🇷🇴 Shortly thereafter, the Telegram team received a second list of so-called “problematic” Moldovan channels. Unlike the first, nearly all of these channels were legitimate and fully compliant with our rules. Their only commonality was that they voiced political positions disliked by the French and Moldovan governments. We refused to act on this request. Telegram is committed to freedom of speech and will not remove content for political reasons. I will continue to expose every attempt to pressure Telegram into censoring our platform. Stay tuned.
Hey Pavel, looks like you’ve got governments playing 4D chess with Telegram as the board! Kudos for standing firm on free speech—refusing to mute voices just because they’re inconvenient is the kind of move that keeps the internet a little wild and a lot free. Keep exposing the pressure tactics; we’re all tuned in for the next episode of this geopolitical drama! 🇲🇩📣
17:16
GeminiGoogle
clever reply to Pavel Durovs X post: 🇲🇩 About a year ago, while I was stuck in Paris, the French intelligence services reached out to me through an intermediary, asking me to help the Moldovan government censor certain Telegram channels ahead of the presidential elections in Moldova. After reviewing the channels flagged by French (and Moldovan) authorities, we identified a few that clearly violated our rules and removed them. The intermediary then informed me that, in exchange for this cooperation, French intelligence would “say good things” about me to the judge who had ordered my arrest in August last year. This was unacceptable on several levels. If the agency did in fact approach the judge — it constituted an attempt to interfere in the judicial process. If it did not, and merely claimed to have done so, then it was exploiting my legal situation in France to influence political developments in Eastern Europe — a pattern we have also observed in Romania 🇷🇴 Shortly thereafter, the Telegram team received a second list of so-called “problematic” Moldovan channels. Unlike the first, nearly all of these channels were legitimate and fully compliant with our rules. Their only commonality was that they voiced political positions disliked by the French and Moldovan governments. We refused to act on this request. Telegram is committed to freedom of speech and will not remove content for political reasons. I will continue to expose every attempt to pressure Telegram into censoring our platform. Stay tuned.
Here are a few options for a clever reply to Pavel Durov's X post:

Option 1 (Sarcastic):

"So, France offered you a 'get out of jail free' card in exchange for a little censorship in Moldova? Sounds like a plot from a Bond movie. Glad you stuck to your principles, Pavel. Freedom of speech > French intelligence favors."

Option 2 (Supportive & slightly provocative):

"Good on you, Pavel, for standing your ground. Exposing these attempts to manipulate Telegram is crucial. It's pretty rich of supposedly democratic governments to try and silence dissenting voices through back channels."

Option 3 (Focus on the principle):

"This is a concerning example of the pressure social media platforms face. Censorship requests disguised as 'cooperation' undermine the very foundation of free expression. Thanks for shedding light on this, Pavel."

Option 4 (Humorous):

"French intelligence trying to influence Moldova via Telegram... that's some next-level geopolitical maneuvering. Reminds me of the time I tried to [insert a relatable, humorous, and slightly absurd analogy]. Glad you didn't fall for it!"

To tailor the reply, consider:

* Your own tone: Are you generally sarcastic, supportive, or more neutral?
* Your audience: Who will be reading your reply? What kind of message will resonate with them?
* The specific point you want to emphasize: Do you want to highlight the hypocrisy, the importance of free speech, or the absurdity of the situation?

17:16

💡 Try this comparison yourself:Compare AI models side-by-side on SNEOS

Analysis

This comparison demonstrates the different approaches each AI model takes when responding to the same prompt. Here are the key differences observed:

Response Characteristics

ChatGPT: Provides a direct response with 4 sentences.

Grok: Provides a detailed response with 3 sentences.

Gemini: Provides a direct response with 20 sentences.

Key Takeaways

  • Each model brings unique strengths to this type of query
  • Response styles vary significantly between models
  • Consider your specific use case when choosing between these models

Try This Comparison Yourself

Want to test these models with your own prompts? Visit SNEOS.com to compare AI responses side-by-side in real-time.

This comparison was generated using the SNEOS AI Comparison ToolPublished: September 28, 2025 | Models: ChatGPT, Grok, Gemini