A platform gained hundreds of millions of users while using restrictions. It stopped using those restrictions and their users started to drop. And you think that means people want that? That's silly.
If twitter has 300 million users and has free speech, then people want free speech. Twitter has 300 million users and has free speech. People want free speech.
If twitter has 300 million users and has free speech, then it is false that all people would leave the site that has free speech. Twitter has 300 million users and has free speech. It is false that all people would leave the site that has free speech.
P1) If 300 million people stayed on Twitter after Twitter allowed free speech, then 300 million people value free speech enough to stay on twitter.
P2) 300 million people stayed on Twitter after Twitter allowed free speech
C) 300 million people value free speech enough to stay on Twitter.
P1) If people dont want free speech, twitter wouldnt have 300 million users.
P2) Twitter has 300 million users.
C) It is false that people dont want free speech.
P1) If 300 million people stayed on twitter after twitter allowed free speech, then 300 million people want to use the site that has free speech.
P2) 300 million people stayed on twitter after twitter allowed free speech
C) 300 million people want to use the site that has free speech
Given that your argument, if it can be called that, was that people would leave site that has free speech, we see the example of twitter refuting your argument.
P1) If lots of people value free speech, then lots of people will value free speech on social media.
P2) Lots of people value free speech
C) Lots of people will value free speech on social media.
The only way to argue against this is to argue that very few people value freedom of speech lmao
Of course, there are people that would like to silence the opposition and abolish free speech. However:
P1) If freedom of speech is a right, it cannot be taken away because some people disagree with it.
P2) Freedom of speech is a right.
C) Freedom of speech cannot be taken away because some people disagree with it.
P1) If freedom of speech is a right, then it is more important than some profit.
P2) Freedom of speech is a right
C) Freedom of speech is more important than some profit.
Now, if you say: freedom of speech should be abolished any time there could be harm, then:
P1) If promoting harm can cause harm, then promoting harm should be banned.
P2) Promoting harm can cause harm
C) Promoting harm should be banned.
P1) If LGBT promoting abortions and castration can cause death and violence, then LGBT promoting abortions and castrations should be banned.
P2) LGBT promoting abortions and castration can cause death and violence
C) LGBT promoting abortions and castrations should be banned.
Promoting abortions and castrations means promoting death and violence.
P1) If LGBT books promote death and violence towards children, then LGBT books should be banned
P2) LGBT books promote death and violence towards children
C) LGBT books should be banned
There are only few positions you can hold, but none is good for your rainbow ideology.
