Thats a strawman. I hate right wing bigots as mich as you do, but I don't think Musk belongs to that crowd. Here is what he actually said: (a) censorship decisions should be made by courts not private companies (b) moderation should be transparent (c) priorisation algorithms should be open source.

I think this is a sane and principled stand that is very different from: "I want to enable bigots."

A platform should have the right to have whatever speech that they deem appropriate. A court deciding that literally contradicts your argument. 2. Moderation is up to each private organization, they can moderate, moderate lightly, heavily moderate, etc, it’s their company and their choice 3. “They should” aka it’s their choice. You don’t have a sound argument at all

allowing abusive people to remain on the platform until the abused somehow get court orders, definitely doesn't sound very sane to me

rather, it sounds like a way to turn twitter into another in a long line of mostly-empty "freedom"-touting social networks that prioritized tolerance of abuse over user experience

as a Twitter shareholder, I'd prefer ElMu not ruin it, or my investment, like that