> What I said is that Parag Agrawal and team made the conscious decision to institute censorship policies incompatible with the First Amendment. You actually s

> What I said is that Parag Agrawal and team made the conscious decision to institute censorship policies incompatible with the First Amendment. You actually said they don't believe in the First Amendment, but I'll take you at your word regarding what you meant. And I'd agree. They didn't run the platform in a way that gave people as much liberty as the First Amendment guarantees them (qua government). They were running a social media platform. It's best practice when running one to not grant 1A-level privileges; doing so makes it way more likely you'll hit an actual legal snag like "this site was complicit in planning an insurrection." Your claim basically boils down to "I like the new censorship regime; it's better than the old one." Sure; everyone has a preferred flavor of online community. But as I noted in a peer thread: Twitter does, if anything, more censorship now than it used to. It just no longer actively pushes Nazi shit off the platform as often, and my opinion of it reflects that new reality. So does its advertising base. (Hey, while we're on the subject: how do you feel about what it says regarding Musk's version of the First Amendment that he's suing reporters for reporting true facts?)