Mountain_Skies' anecdote above certainly does not meet any form of "obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionabl

Mountain_Skies' anecdote above certainly does not meet any form of "obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable", nor does (say) any of the objective reporting & fair discussion of the Kyle Rittenhouse incident, or other commonplace views normalized among fully half the population. Arbitrary culling of content which does not constitute "obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable" is exactly what "publisher" applies to, and which is the point of this thread. We can agree to disagree, while watching Kyle Rittenhouse sue Facebook (maybe not quite into oblivion, but the number of digits in the settlement check should be striking) and the court clarify exactly which of us is right to what degree. Popcorn?