[ichbinwiederda]

I don't think that you can stick to philosophical principles because those tend to be too simplistic and real life is messy. Twitter as a private entity should in theory have the right to do whatever they want. OTOH, their platform gives them influence over the democratic process. In theory people shouldn't be censored. OTOH it is easy to fool people with targeted propaganda.

Philosophizing is not going to get you anywhere, really. It's a technique of the past. There are many competing effects at play here. I think the more rational approach is to actually study the real world system to find a policy optimum that achieves a set goal. Philosophy should be relegated to figuring out that goal e.g. should it be democracy over all else or maybe individual rights or something else.

[freedomben]

I don't think we can escape philosophy. For example you it sounds to me like you are arguing for the philosophy of pragmatic consequentialism :-D

Who's outcome is most important here then? Is it Twitter's, is it the users, or the public at large? And how do you determine which is what? Draw a line at 50% and say if it benefits (a subjective measure) more than 50% then it's a good outcome, otherwise bad?

[varvar]

Yeah, mud them those waters.