Are you comparing Facebook's property to a person's lawn? Because that is nonsense. I really don't agree with people comparing ubiquitous global telecom monopo

Are you comparing Facebook's property to a person's lawn? Because that is nonsense. I really don't agree with people comparing ubiquitous global telecom monopolies like Facebook to small businesses and private citizens who want people to stay off their lawns and not have the government regulate their IRC server that they run out of their basement. If you don't just own a lawn, but you own every lawn in the town and every single space where people could congregate, then no I don't think you should have absolute control over who can use it. Coal corporations and sharecroppers tried doing that a century ago with "company towns". If you own more than a certain amount of property, you have responsibilities as well as rights. You can't just build your own little nation within a nation, because you can afford the land. And you certainly can't use your money and influence to bully and evict people because you disagree with them. Many churches have done that in the past. You can't circumvent our laws by just privatizing everything. Internet platforms over a certain size need to be required to reflect American values.