The whole "dedication to free speech" mantra is cute, but ultimately just reeks of a failed bet on how to run the company. From a technical perspective, lettin

The whole "dedication to free speech" mantra is cute, but ultimately just reeks of a failed bet on how to run the company. From a technical perspective, letting essentially anyone say anything is easier to handle. The engineering resources that would otherwise go towards advanced content filtering and detection, etc can now just focus on making the platform scale. That works out well when a company is growing like crazy in the early days. From a business perspective, the hate-spewing users are "really engaged with the product." Having a lot of users in this category is a great thing to tell investors. Also, the growth from these users is something investors like, too. So it's also a win from a business perspective. I'm guessing that Twitter's leadership made a decision early on. Something along the lines of "let's go with the free speech thing for now. It lends itself to efficient allocation of engineering resources and improving key metrics." When you're growing as fast as Twitter in the early days, it's not necessarily a bad choice. However, the current growth stagnation and other negative issues surrounding the company is really starting to expose the downsides of that haphazard decision.