Humans don't work like formal logic processors and are capable of navigating the ambiguity between "ban spammers" and "editorialize" without much difficulty. >

Humans don't work like formal logic processors and are capable of navigating the ambiguity between "ban spammers" and "editorialize" without much difficulty. > All section 230 does is make clear that if you don't have people signing off on each and every bit of content on your platform, but respond with a good effort to reports of illegal content, then you will not be held responsible for someone using your platform as a way to do illegal things. Web hosts that just serve content when a client requests it should definitely have this protection. Great idea. YouTube promoting outrage bait because it makes them more money? God no, no protection beyond what any other business doing that would have, not on the Internet. The line's somewhere between those.