No public schools banned Harry Potter, because they cannot do so.

And a private school "banning" a book isn't an actual ban. You could still purchase and read the book if you desired.

So a private company can do what they want?

But Twitch can't?

I think we're having that debate right now, no?

Was it wrong for a private school to "ban" a book? I think so... do you?

So you're having a different debate to what the article is about.

Do you think it's wrong for twitch to ban people for: "terrorist activities, child sexual exploitation, violent extremism, credible threats of mass violence, carrying out or deliberately acting as an accomplice to sexual assault and threatening Twitch or its staff."?

Banning a book isn't even in the same ball park. I think it's pathetic of the school.

Twitch is technically a public company (Amazon), but I don't think there's any difference in this case.

Well, they already call out terrorist activities, which makes me wonder what "violent extremism" refers to. Maybe something as simple as taking a hard line against abortion and peacefully holding a sign outside a clinic could be considered violently extreme?