I feel like shutting up the people who harassed and blackmailed me on social media a few months ago. I think if I were to start doing so though I would be met with quite a bit of objections from people.

If someone said something you didn't like in the comments on a site you owned, and you wanted to erase them, do you feel that you don't have that right. (even if you expressly state that you do reserve such a right when people signed up to your site?)

Legally I do think site owners should have that right, but it would be highly tacky to exercise it

Morality and honesty perhaps? If Twitter wants to be a left wing outlet a la Daily Kos, that's fine, but they should at least be honest about it. Preaching openness, transparency, and honesty while doing the opposite is orwellian.

Do you mean the same left wing outlet that let the president violate their content policies for years, and said they did so because of the significant of the figure doing it?

I mean, its real easy to get hyper focused on a specific instance and start making claims like that.

But I think if you take a step back, they have let a lot of dirt swing from both side, and in the face of overwhelming pressure from the public have started to be more restrictive on this sort of propaganda as the election is coming up.

False equivalency. Even Dorsey admitted in a Vox article a couple years ago that his company leans so far left that right leaning employees fear to express their opinions. Twitter has been uneven in its application of rules for quite a while now, and I admit this as a left leaning person! I don't believe in censoring opinions I disagree with just because it benefits those with whom I agree.

A company policy is not dictated by the personal opinions of its employees, many companies have a series of audits and separation of control to prevent corruption and biased. I don't know that twitter does, but I don't think it is fair to say that because the employees of a company are left leaning the organization is.

I believe that twitter censorship policies are far more about optics and what is more commercially viable for the company.

You can bet the reason they didn't ban the president for the numerous policy violations is because he is driving traffic and engagement on their platform.

That isn't to say that certain employees won't overstep bounds and act on personal feelings, but that doesn't mean twitter as an organization is leaning left or right.

Corporations lean in the direction of profit, far more than moral or political leanings.

Everyone polices their 'platform'... Heck even mods for /r/TheDonald would ban anything anti-Trump, so are they not just as guilty as Twitter?

They are not equivalent. Thedonald (didn't they get banned?) markets itself as an online Trump rally and is upfront about the rules as far as I'm aware. Twitter has a set of rules that they enforce in an uneven and selective fashion. Not at all the same thing.