The thing about Twitter is that they had rules that Trump was breaking regularly; and invented an entirely new "world leaders policy"[0] and "public interest policy"[1] to justify not banning him. They even exempted him from DMCA repeat-infringer policies[2] when music artists started taking down his tweets with their music in them. Had Twitter not intervened on January 9th, Trump would have been gotten banned anyway when he left office, purely because of him no longer being an elected politician.
My personal opinion is that even if the thing that gets banned or removed finds an audience (and it will), it's still a good idea for any platform - from a tiny webforum to a billions-strong social network - to have speech rules that are fair and reasonably enforced. It's not fun to be on a platform where a handful of celebrities and politicians (incl. Trump) are regularly flouting rules you have to follow.
Furthermore, I'd much rather be in a community in which the loudest and most obnoxious users are shown the door, purely for my own sanity. Free-for-alls stop being fun when they outgrow their original userbase.
My personal opinion is that even if the thing that gets banned or removed finds an audience (and it will), it's still a good idea for any platform - from a tiny webforum to a billions-strong social network - to have speech rules that are fair and reasonably enforced. It's not fun to be on a platform where a handful of celebrities and politicians (incl. Trump) are regularly flouting rules you have to follow.
Furthermore, I'd much rather be in a community in which the loudest and most obnoxious users are shown the door, purely for my own sanity. Free-for-alls stop being fun when they outgrow their original userbase.
[0] https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2019/worldlead...
[1] https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/public-intere...
[2] https://torrentfreak.com/could-trumps-twitter-account-be-dmc...