[nxsynonym]

I agree with you. The only thing that censorship brings in this particular case is a safe space for advertisers. I see exactly 0 harm in sharing a platform with people with alternate views than me.

If you don't like the way a social platform is heading, then leave it. You are not entitled to a safe space.

At the end of the day twitter is going to cater to its biggest and most influential users.

It costs you nothing to ignore the users who are saying things you don't like.

[GVIrish]

> The only thing that censorship brings in this particular case is a safe space for advertisers.

What??? There are people out there getting death threats, getting doxxed, being attacked with all manner of epithets on Twitter. It stands to reason that maybe the experience would be better for those people without that sort of content directed at them.

> If you don't like the way a social platform is heading, then leave it. You are not entitled to a safe space.

Yes. And as a business, Twitter has a vested interest in not letting their platform drive away swaths of users due to toxicity. Indeed, one of the key reasons Facebook was successful is that users have the ability to restrict communications to the people they want to.

[pjc50]

> I see exactly 0 harm in sharing a platform with people with alternate views than me.

Spoken like someone who's never been the victim of a targeted harassment campaign. It's a little hard to take that view when people are posting pictures of your children's school along with their death threats.

[nprz]

Since when is sharing a platform with people whose political views differ from yours equal to allowing targeted harassment? I don't think many would disagree that someone who threatens real life violence on someone should result in a banning from that platform. But an automatic ban based on political affiliation seems undemocratic.

[pjc50]

The original article doesn't mention anything like "an automatic ban based on political affiliation". The de-verification of white supremacists argument hinges around both verification as endorsement, and the possibility that some political beliefs (white supremacy) are in themselves a threat of violence.

[nxsynonym]

Meh, these threats exist in the real world as well. You can't silence everybody who might possibly be a threat at some point.

Those who actually make the threats should be dealt with, but last time I checked it's "innocent until proven guilty" not "guilty until proven liberal".

[jff]

Yeah, it's pretty fucked up when an internet lynch mob gets you fired because you said "dongle" or something similarly bad.