Nobody light a match. There's a lot of straw men in such a small space. Let's be clear: no one wants Nazis or advocates for pedophilia or folks fetishizing the

Nobody light a match. There's a lot of straw men in such a small space. Let's be clear: no one wants Nazis or advocates for pedophilia or folks fetishizing the consumption of feces on their online platform. Because they hate free speech? No. Because they like censorship? No. If you let Nazis and Flat Earthers hang out in your servers, most everyone else will leave; they don't want to listen to same old nonsense and bile when they have better things to discuss and share. That suppresses ad revenue, lowers profits, makes you lay employees off, etc. Let's see examples like Parler and Gab. Launched as online communities free from censorship. Who went there? Folks who believed in free speech as a principle, some random other folks, and a few Nazis. Why would you want to go somewhere with folks constantly going on about Jewish space lasers? So random people leave. What's left? More Nazis per 1,000 users, which makes the platform more intolerable for non-Nazis who accept that The Holocaust actually happened and was unambiguously a BAD thing. So more free speech advocates leave because the Nazi rhetoric and other 4chan-like speech ceases to be worth it for them. Nazi per 1,000 user level continues to rise. Wash, rinse, and repeat. It's not censorship to be denied a megaphone by Twitter when you'll gladly be given one on Gab. That's not censorship; that's simply folks not wanting to subscribe to your newsletter. There is no universal right guaranteeing that people must pay attention to you. It should be noted however that many of the same people crying censorship are the same ones trying to get books like "To Kill a Mockingbird" removed from public school libraries. If you want to fight against censorship, I wouldn't start with Twitter.