It's hilarious to read things like: ”[Threads] is not a free speech platform." Where the implication is that Twitter is, somehow, more free-speech oriented. A

It's hilarious to read things like: ”[Threads] is not a free speech platform." Where the implication is that Twitter is, somehow, more free-speech oriented. A company which since the acquisition: - suspended journalists without violation of any Twitter rule - complied with foreign government requests to remove tweets (something which Elon had been critical of the previous execs) - banned ElonJet - declared cis and cisgender to be a slur and a bannable offense (free speech absolutism for misgendering and dead naming but not this, interesting) - banning users who posted about #BlockTheBlue - prevented people from posting, seeing, liking, replying to, or retweeting tweets with Substack links - threatened to suspend accounts with Mastodon or Instagram links in their profile or in tweets, additionally marking links to Mastodon as malware - is currently preventing Threads from trending (supposedly) Twitter is not a free speech platform and that's okay, the owner can do whatever he wants with it. To say it is when the actual track record says otherwise is ridiculous. Elon's posturing and virtue signaling about this has been the most annoying part; just say it's yours and you'll do what you want! This is no different from Threads by the way. Zuck has his own goals, biases, and whims that he'll bend Threads to. Again, that's okay, we just need to acknowledge that!