> You just do it without Section 230 protection. But that's the thing. Section 230 doesnt really have anything to do with moderation. In fact, it allows websit

> You just do it without Section 230 protection. But that's the thing. Section 230 doesnt really have anything to do with moderation. In fact, it allows websites that has user generated content to exist without moderation. I think/hope we agree that its completely reasonable and normal for websites to moderate the content on their sites. For example, I want Twitter to take down child pornography posted. Literally hate speech - calls for genecides and violence against people - websites should have the legal ability to remove that from their sites. I do not think there should be any consequences towards the websites for wanting to remove this content. If you remove 230 protections from websites, it forces the sites that are able to survivce to moderate more by making them legally liable for the content published.