[o-__-o]

And how long until my edgey, morally bankrupt idea gets banned because a few rich people decided to act as their own hired politician to do “what’s right” for us?

This is a slippery slope, we used it to silence a sitting president.. these same companies won’t hesitate to silence you

[TulliusCicero]

Apple has had minimum standards since the app store was made, so...since over a decade ago?

> This is a slippery slope, we used it to silence a sitting president..

Maybe if he didn't want to get banned from a platform, he should've avoided constantly lying and breaking the rules of said platform?

Like, you're literally suggesting "the president should be above the rules".

[o-__-o]

Nope. I am able to open my eyes and see that in the future this situation may be well exist again but under a different context. And we will point back to today as an example of why we should allow it.

PS if he was breaking rules of the platform for so long why ban him only after they know he lost the election? Seems to go along with my “powerful people make the rules” complaint.

[TulliusCicero]

Because he went further than just lying, and was also inciting violence.

Personally, I feel like they should've just banned him to begin with for all the lying, but being a private business, they have the right to decide who gets to speak on their own platform.

[throwaway19937]

> PS if he was breaking rules of the platform for so long why ban him only after they know he lost the election? Seems to go along with my “powerful people make the rules” complaint.

If you ban him before the election and he wins, then he has 4 years to retaliate against you.