At this point there are only two sides, absolute Free Speech, or objectively incorrect people. There's no middle ground lmao. There's no need to argue about it either. You're either for absolute Free Speech or you're wrong and there is no need for further communication. You either understand the problem with Big Tech censorship proper, or you're objectively wrong and in support of oligarchic control over what you get to say in the modern public forum. Don't bother arguing with me about it either, we're well past that and I'm done jebaiting handicaps on the subject.
There's no need for any further discussion on whether or not it's okay for a handful of people to control the main internet sphere. There's no need to talk about if it's okay for them to shut down competitor sites under the guide of moral action. There's no need to argue over the rights of a "private company" and whether or not it's okay for them to do it. You either agree that they shouldn't be able to and discuss how to fix it, or you think they should, and you're too stupid to be spoken to. You are actively standing in the way of a civil society by denying Free Speech as it is the foundation of redressing grievances. By silencing people you are effectively telling them the only way to get their point across is through violence. You are actively encouraging violent action by encouraging the tech oligarchy to censor you and the people you don't like because it delivers catharsis. Because you are too handicapped to be bothered with.
I've been annoyed wondering why people are so stupid as to cheer on censorship but I've come to realize it doesn't matter and there's no point dwelling upon it. Free Speech or you're a handicap. No middle ground, no need to talk about it. That's all.