I have no issue with any of these worst-case scenarios you mention because 1) these were people who opted-in to listen to these people (who might also have bias

I have no issue with any of these worst-case scenarios you mention because 1) these were people who opted-in to listen to these people (who might also have biased websites: "big whoop") and 2) I maintain, as I argue in more detail in my other response to someone else, that the current situation is worse for biased censorship of the platform as a whole because it implies that we are going to decide what is "abuse or brigading" as part of some centralized filter, with the result that some people are just going to either lose access to the platform entirely--even to talk to their own audience--and/or certain subjects are going to become verboten due to some disagreement with the zeitgeist. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28661600 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28661600 We need to stop building centralized filters and instead push all of the moderation to the edges--even when I admit it maybe feels awkward at first glance--as it is what eventually ensures that we all have a right to communicate. You get to decide what is talked about in your Telegram channel, WhatsApp group, or (yes) Twitter sub-thread so that I have the right to decide what is talked about in mine... lest we both lose the ability to decide such after passing it off to some centralized "offensive speech" filter that ends up deciding all photos of nipples, talk of non-normative sexuality, discussion of COVID-19, or information about the latest Russian election are off-limits, because you simply can't build a centralized system for moderation without marching straight into a dystopia. https://youtu.be/vsazo-Gs7ms https://youtu.be/vsazo-Gs7ms