I feel my point is clear. People who advocate that Twitter should not exercise editorial control over content are hypocrites for using HN's community editorial

I feel my point is clear. People who advocate that Twitter should not exercise editorial control over content are hypocrites for using HN's community editorial control tools to suppress, or remove, content that they don't agree with on HN. People who value free speech as an absolute right in virtually all contexts have no business curtailing what they argue is an absolute right when it is exercised by people who have views they disagree with. . . . . As a substantive question, I agree that Twitter is large enough that it should be regarded as an infrastructure platform, akin to the phone carriers, and should not be expected to unilaterally decide on the fair bounds of political speech. That much power does not belong in the hands of any one CEO. Absent a more suitable long-term legal framework to combat propaganda, however, unilateral action is the best of a set of very bad choices. The political situation in America is far too dangerous for potential disinformation to spread unchecked. If there is truth to the NY Post story, it will be corroborated by other news outlets and will eventually find its way to Twitter via that route. Until that happens, however, October surprises of potentially dubious validity should not be allowed to spread unchecked.