I'm not sure how I feel about this. Correcting obvious falsehoods seems fine, but something about a platform moving from being (_vaguely_) neutral to directly c

I'm not sure how I feel about this. Correcting obvious falsehoods seems fine, but something about a platform moving from being (_vaguely_) neutral to directly critiquing content feels off. Further, where do you draw the line? Correcting things that are unequivocally, proven wrong casts a small net, but adding information to loose speculation, or discuss of events that are denied but not disproven, risks making a stronger statement than the evidence allows and risks shutting down legitimate discussion.