They've been trying to position themselves as "safe" for years now with their "Trust & Safety Council" and other such nonsense. They repeatedly use "safe" and "

They've been trying to position themselves as "safe" for years now with their "Trust & Safety Council" and other such nonsense. They repeatedly use "safe" and "safety" in their press releases about their new policies. The replies to my previous comment including yours seem to be missing the point: of course Twitter doesn't remotely begin to deliver on any of these promises of "safety," yet Twitter is still presented as the "safe" alternative to Gab et al. Personally I don't mind seeing "hate speech" because a.) I see hate speech about my own race, sex, and religion on a nearly daily basis at this point and b.) I realize that "deplatforming hate" doesn't do anything but cause it to coalesce elsewhere. By showing that Twitter isn't as "safe" as they claim to be, I'm questioning why we're continuing to use it instead of either a completely-free-speech or a better-curated actually-more-"safe" alternative.