[funimpoded]

I once spent an hour or so tracking down and reading parts of the twitter files specifically highlighted by people loudly complaining about them (as I figured those would be the worst bits) and it was mostly pretty yawn-worthy in context.

That might be why they didn't get more attention.

[giancarlostoro]

So you're saying that the FBI using Twitter as a proxy to violate US citizens First Amendment right is not an issue? Because that's my entire point. There is absolutely no context that okays the FBI doing this, once you open pandoras box, you allow other administrations (including the current) to use the same "power" that they should have never had to begin with.

[funimpoded]

“Yo, this violates your rules” and then twitter sometimes going “yep, true, we’ll do something” and sometimes “nah” is pretty low on my list of concerns, yeah.

Then again I also don’t think any company should have the reach any of the major media companies do these days. But antitrust and media-diversity regulations and laws have been out of fashion since the ‘70s.

[giancarlostoro]

Except Twitter staff debated if they actually broke any rules repeatedly, and later said, that, nope, no they did not. So you're not making any sense. Why read the raw source if you're not paying attention to their own words after the fact where the executives admit they goofed big time?