I mean all things considered, pre-Musk buyout, Twitter was largely the least moderated of the major social media sites I'm aware of. Yes, people constantly brigaded and flooded the like buttons, but unlike Facebook groups or subreddits, users couldn't ban other users comments, so you'd just have to accept the extremists.
So if Musk literally did nothing but continue that pattern, he could justifiably make the claim that it's as close to a bastion of free speech as could be allowed on a social media site of its size.
wow. It's almost like you haven't been around the past month. Did you even read the Twitter files? They were banning and shadow-banning all sorts of people! (They just called it "visibility filtering").
I am aware, but my point is that I'm decently confident that all big social media sites do what twitter does, on top of allowing community moderation tools, which Twitter largely does not.
The original claim is that Twitter was the least moderated. The argument was an argument in support of that. You're tilting at windmills, arguing against claims nobody made.
From what I saw it was just some people on Bidens campaign team reaching out asking Twitter to take down some tweets that contained leaked nudes of Bidens son, in line with Twitters ToS.
I feel like I've missed the boat on this, everyone is pointing at a smoking gun, but I haven't seen it yet.
Here's the last dump: part 5. From there you should be able to find the previous.
It's not just about "some nudes of Biden's son". It is about the suppression of a NY Post story about a laptop his son lost. It had details about conversations and taking money from foreign nationals. Supposedly, it was deemed Russian disinformation, but that was all a lie. It was real.
So if Musk literally did nothing but continue that pattern, he could justifiably make the claim that it's as close to a bastion of free speech as could be allowed on a social media site of its size.