You miss the point where I said I am for updating the old platform protection so that if social media doesn't curate, it is protected

who defines what qualifies as curation?

What publishers do

Decide what can and cannot be written

Decide what writers on their staff can and cannot say

They do that, they can get sued for what their writers write.

ok, what if i want to tell everyone on the platform about big dick energy pills that'll give you rock hard erections for hours. only $99.99

There's already something like this and it's a problem

Then you sue the person, not the platform

yeah, but under your policy it would be protected.

No, the platform would be

If you want to remain e.g. kid-friendly, you have to buy into a whole lot of baggage

you can't sue someone for wanting to give you massive boners all night long

Then too bad, if it's lawful speech, it's allowed

It means that if you try _any_ kind of moderation, you're on the hook for all content

the end result of that chain of logic is /b/

which barely survives

Porn laws might make something like that unlawful speech without some kinds of protection

on the edge of bankruptcy and federal seizure

what porn laws?

Those that require porn sites to have the 18 and over check box

i've seen viagra and cialis commercials on TV.

perfectly family friendly

Okay, why can't they be on social media?

why indeed? we can have every second reply to every post be about big dick energy that'll make your woman swoon

We could. We could have bots. How do you prove an account is a bot?

i constantly receive messages from helpful people telling me about 7 ways to DESTROY toenail fungus

i'm trying to say that there are lots and lots (and *lots*) of unforeseen consequences to your approach.

If we allow them to ban people who are spamming, then we allow them to ban anyone they don't like.

whereas if we just try to boot companies in the dick for colluding to squash competitors, we don't have to upset the current balance.

Because what is the difference between someone standing outside trump tower repeating orange man bad and someone spamming that on social media?

spam is automated and outnumbers humans in volume.

Social media involve using someone else's resources to do your shouting

Okay, so then we agree Twitter can keep on doing what it is doing

I mean, who are we to force them to host someone they don't want?

Megaphones help boost speech too, should megaphone companies be forced to give them for free?

IMO the way forward is technological

Things like Minds that are by-design censorship-resistant

Or where even the platform holders can't see what's going on without user assistance

I would agree there

Although that has some way to go still