> If you suppress opposing viewpoints, you're also suppressing any evidence that you might be wrong. So what is your proposal? Twitter should continue spending

> If you suppress opposing viewpoints, you're also suppressing any evidence that you might be wrong. So what is your proposal? Twitter should continue spending their money on promoting something which may lead to millions of people dying? Or is it something else? My viewpoint is that your reasoning is incredible naive, well into the area of stupidity.