@marathon0 well, sure, I don't think any media, online or offline both managed to provide a reasonable user experience as well as that kind of free speech protections for their users.

I don't believe most users on twitter wanted *less* moderation. To me, the largest problems in using that platform was trolling, pile-ons, disinformation, inauthentic behavior (spam, organized campaigns..), etc, and I certainly wanted both better filtering options for users and both a stonger and more consistant policy in content warnings and removals. For now, I'm def more impressed w options I'm getting here, but I realise scale might change that.

Idk I'm in the EU where such an expansive/exclusive understanding of the right to free speech doesn't exist in the first place, with various content actually illegal to utter (hopefully narrowly proscribed though I worry re some rulings) , and the regulator is likely to insist w the new DMA directive on procedures for removal of various content deemed illegal in my jurisdiction... so I'll just grab a bag of popcorn and enjoy that showdown.

None of this has much to do with the tweet you quoted, at least I think it doesn't, as I said that seems to be a kind of bare minimum commitment any social network, forum, hell even a personal blog is likely to provide anyhow. Only a rather thin-skinned person would particularly target people just for them being critical of their work or person.

@takloufer There are many 'thin-skinned people in the world. If I were you, I'd worry more about the disinformation and propaganda the EU is selling you folks in the MSM.
Many liberals (I'm left leaning) can't stand other viewpoints, therefore they want others censured. I've been alive long enough to see it everywhere.

One example, 'Trans women'.

Anyone with half a brain would realize that trans woman competing against women born as women in sport, isn't fair.
Yet the US swim team has allowed this to happen. A previous individual who was born male was on the male swim team previously, and never placed anywhere near the top rankings ever.
Yet, competing against women, he comes in 1st. The other women, who placed 2nd, 3rd, and fourth, were not impressed.

Now my point is, that on many social platforms just mentioning this will have you censured for 'hate speech' which it isn't.
Just defies common sense! And yes I was censured on a different Mastodon instance for posting a documentary about the same subject!
If Musk means censorship like this needs to stop, then I don't have a problem with his viewpoint at all. Finally some sanity in the world.

@marathon0 well, thank you for the 'warning' but I'm not particularly concerned about disinformation or censorship in my media diet, such as it is.

Re trans issues, I'd agree its a stretch to call that narrow example hate speech, even though I completely disagree there's any problem in including trans athletes on adequate testosterone supression for adequate time in female sports, and I wouldn't see a problem there even if evidence were completely convincing this still left significant and relevant athletic advantage.

But I also have no intention on randomly arguing about trans issues on a post that had literally nothing to do with it.

@takloufer
You were talking about Musk and censorship. I gave you an example of such censorship, so of course it has something to do with your subjective criteria.
In terms of Trans women in high-end sports. You're on very shaky ground, as testosterone reduction still gives the edge to the converted man, due to musculature and bone density and size. I'll post the article where the doctors in that type of research argue this. You see I do my research, and don't do 'knee-jerk' reactions or try not to.
And … it really is common sense, especially when one sees the individual I'm talking about. He/she is literally huge!
If trans women wish to compete in sport, it should be a separate category in my opinion.

@marathon0 but it *wasn't* a tweet about censorship, rather about his 'magnanimous' tolerance of his critics, a posture I found rather laughable. Really it was this dissonance between the high ideal he was supposedly defending and the childish example that prompted me to point it out. Like where does one's mind have to be in the first place to consider that inaction as something to brag about?

Again re trans inclusion in sports, I completely disagree re a separate league, even if significant advantage remains after what can be done to limit it is done, but if that was merely a random example of a discussion you were censored for, consider the point made. I agree that the extent and existence of such an advantage at least is a factual question, and cannot in itself constitute hate speech. I can also think of many twitter handles who don't seem have trouble making such arguments so it cannot be the kind of free speech currently lacking on twitter either. But sure, wouldn't surprise me if a particular mastodon instance wants no such discourse on their system.