True, but... do you approve of that? Do you think people should be free to use social media for threats and intimidation?
Facebook is shutting down what it considers the most prominent, aggressive, and dangerous of those who do such things. That is not, in itself, bad.
If they proceed to shut down the right but not the left, if they start deciding that mainstream right positions are "hate speech", that's going to be a problem. But if they have kind of a threshold, and anybody else who crosses that threshold (no matter what their position) gets shut down, that's a good thing. (The threshold may be higher than many of us like. That's probably also a good thing.)
Yes, if they could establish an objective threshold that'd be great. Probably simplest is to restrict to actual threats.
But, someone saying transgenderism might be a mental disorder is not a threat, so should not be banned. Likewise saying capitalism has led to overpopulation, environmental destruction and cultural imperialism is not a threat and should not be banned, regardless of whether it is true or not.
I also think some sort of enforcement of etiquette that is content agnostic would be great, but that's a bit trickier to draw the line.
Facebook is shutting down what it considers the most prominent, aggressive, and dangerous of those who do such things. That is not, in itself, bad.
If they proceed to shut down the right but not the left, if they start deciding that mainstream right positions are "hate speech", that's going to be a problem. But if they have kind of a threshold, and anybody else who crosses that threshold (no matter what their position) gets shut down, that's a good thing. (The threshold may be higher than many of us like. That's probably also a good thing.)