This is a strange reading of section 230. It seems like you're saying that Twitter is not a "provider...of an interactive computer service" because it is choosing what is on its platform, even though in section 2A it specifically provides protections for such providers to "restrict access to or availability of material that the provider...considers to be obscene...or otherwise objectionable". If it is not allowed for a platform to remove content they find objectionable, then why call it out as protected here?