>The road to hell is paved with good intentions. People need to stop and consider the meaning of that phrase and how it applies in the modern day. People don't

>The road to hell is paved with good intentions. People need to stop and consider the meaning of that phrase and how it applies in the modern day. People don't seem to care that we're making "lies" a justifiable basis for censorship. Whether you believe Trump is lying or not, we are accepting and normalizing the existence of a third party that censors things deemed to be "lies" for the greater good. What's more, is that it being defended under the guise of "well, they're a private corporation, etc etc." Yes, and they do have the right, but that is orthogonal to the fact that we are normalizing and welcoming it. Twitter having the right to do it and we as a society supporting their actions are separate from each other. But people like to muddy the waters by claiming that it isn't "censorship" because it's a private corporation. But it is censorship on their platform, and again, the support for the censorship in general is the disturbing part. It's not as if the people supporting Twitter's actions are saying "we should only censor people on Twitter"...they want it everywhere that there is a platform. There's also voices that say "well, it's Trump, and he is the President, so there should be an exception because he can influence a lot of people." Taylor Swift has as many followers (~88M) on Twitter. Do you think if she started saying similar things as Trump, people wouldn't be calling for her censorship too? Can Taylor Swift start a civil war as easy as Trump can? Probably not, but who makes the determination of "you are censored because we believe people will listen to you" ? Controversial speech only seem to be acceptable so long as nobody listens to you. Is that what we want?