Yes, I upvoted the article, because despite being an unhinged rant, I think there is something worthy of discussion in here. How should moderation work in a co

Yes, I upvoted the article, because despite being an unhinged rant, I think there is something worthy of discussion in here. How should moderation work in a community? Should everyone who wants to get their message out to an audience willing to listen be able to do so, or should a minority of people be able to deny them the ability to do so? I think the OP author is wrong to cast this as "left" vs "right", but correct to see that allowing a vocal minority to decide how a larger group is allowed to communicate is an unstable situation. The parallels to "flagging" and "downvoting" on HN are also interesting to contemplate. I think the answer is that such a system can mostly work if-and-only-if there is a trusted authority who can override the mob on a case-by-case basis. Dan does this as well as can be hoped, but Elon seems to still be struggling. But at Twitter's scale, they obviously need a much larger trusted team for this to have a chance of working.