> drama it caused is way overblown and isn't evidence of being 'plagued with censorship.' Maybe "plagued" doesn't apply but that was an important event, at lea

> drama it caused is way overblown and isn't evidence of being 'plagued with censorship.' Maybe "plagued" doesn't apply but that was an important event, at least because it showed that it wasn't just a theoretical possibility and but something that has happened already. So now imagine if there is a court case and content posted on Reddit is used as evidence, I can see an argument being made "it can't be relied one as it could have been edited just like that one time by the CEO himself"