We treat large companies differently from small ones all the time (antitrust, too big to fail, etc.), so I don’t see imposing extra restrictions on something wh

We treat large companies differently from small ones all the time (antitrust, too big to fail, etc.), so I don’t see imposing extra restrictions on something where so much public discourse is happening as too extreme. If it causes smaller competitors to spring up, so much the better. Realize that I’m not arguing that Twitter should be compelled to never flag anything. Just if they do maybe there needs to be a consistent set of laws with due process to appeal the decisions. Here’s a thought experiment: what if say China were to acquire a majority stake in Twitter and downright forbid any disagreeable statement about Taiwan? The fact that this sale would probably not be allowed in the first place for national security reasons should give another hint that something about Twitter is unusual. As for arguing in good faith, when do you think is a good time to have this conversation? It’s great that it worked out for good this time. Sure, let’s wait until he’s safely out of office first. But I think that’s exactly the time to think through this carefully, and not when it’s too late and these powers are used against something you agree with. History is full of examples of failing to think through long term consequences while focussing on the imminent danger.