I think it's interesting to note how differently people see this conversation! > advocated "it's a private company, it can deplatform whoever it wants" To me,

I think it's interesting to note how differently people see this conversation! > advocated "it's a private company, it can deplatform whoever it wants" To me, this compresses several conversations into one: - In the US, the first amendment applies to the government, not to private actors, so companies do not need to allow any particular person on their site (with the provision that it's illegal to ban people because they are part of a protected class). - The idea of a "public square" is in flux and we are in the midst of trying to figure out what areas of our interactions we would like to consider public and what the advantages and disadvantages each approach are. - The tactic of urging private companies to ban certain people for certain reasons as practiced by many groups (often with different justifications). Different groups have different interests at each level and have different preferences as to how policy should change. In some sense, your statement of: "I bet some of those who..." will always be correct because of course *some of them* will! I have a guess about how you feel about the above issues (and other involved issues that I didn't break out), but I'd be interested to have you expand what you actually mean.