Although I think it is rude and slightly creepy to delve into random users' history like this, thanks for bringing it up. I sincerely believed that de-factor m

Although I think it is rude and slightly creepy to delve into random users' history like this, thanks for bringing it up. I sincerely believed that de-factor monopolies (like Twitter) hold a special responsibility to act neutrally, even if the law doesn't compel them to. However, slowly the point that everyone on hn and elsewhere was making, became more and more compelling to me. [0] Compelling a private (non-government owned) enterprise using violent means, to alter their speech or affect their business decisions just doesn't seem like it belongs in a civilized, free society. I don't know if you omitted them on purpose, or just missed them, but my comments have gradually started leaning more and more towards "build your own Twitter if you don't like its policies". So, I assert that my position is consistent with my beliefs, and my beliefs are informed by sound reasoning. On the other hand, many people who helped me form my conviction seem to have given up their own. They seem to think that private property ownership is meaningless and Twitter in Elon Musk's hands is a tool that is destroying democracy. I don't understand this. He did exactly what people told him (he bought his own Twitter). If you do not like it, you are free to build your own. Or buy it from him. I am sure he will be ready to accept a good $1B discount and sell it for $43B cash. [0] I find it funny that my comments arguing exactly the opposite viewpoints on the same issue have been downvoted. Does that suggest a hidden bias in the common crowd on hn?