I know shitlibs suddenly go full von Mises when free speech on "private platforms" (i.e., Twitter, FB) comes up, but can we all *possibly* agree that, if one's voice is restricted on such a platform, it should be for reasons which are both CONSISTENT and JUST?

Strong case to be made for the "public utility" argument, of course, & a lot of shitlibs really show their statism by abandoning this.

And if that is failing to be the case, a class-action suit would certainly seem to be in order. No?