The original post does not clearly specify the source of the infringement judgments. Was it a regulatory body contacting a housing provider? Was it the housing

The original post does not clearly specify the source of the infringement judgments. Was it a regulatory body contacting a housing provider? Was it the housing provider proactively policing content on their servers? Not clear to me. Commenting on 230 seems reasonable, although I didn't catch what jurisdiction this hoster or site I owner are in. Commenting on censorship power by signature l strong-arming the connoisseur that facilitate access to the internet seems reasonable too. But why reply to the 230 post with it, like you're refuting their issue. This could just be a different thread.