Apart from suspensions. Known fraudsters.
So now the TLDR is X.com takes actions against said accounts, but you don't agree with said actions so you downplay the actions and criminalize the ones the actions are taken against.
It's your freedom to say that to a certain extent, but it's not your freedom to say/dictate which actions X should take, that's up to either X or law enforcement.
Alternate facts is not free speech. It is fraud.
That really depends there are indeed ''alternative facts'' that are downright lies, (deliberate)misinterpretations and so further and so forth. but they are not limited to social media. The amount of snacks/products/etc. sold with the word ''PROTEIN'' these days while it should say ''SUGAR'' instead for example are just the same.
But there are other area's where things are less clear, you can't claim just because someone shows something from an different angle it has to be an scam. (the fact that the majority of these things are actually either scams or conspiracy's does not take anything away from this point)
Indeed. Only then high profile scammers NORMALLY/QUICKLY get banned
It that statement based on any fact or is it just based on your views? Because my experience certainly is very different, then again ''normally/quickly'' is quite up for interpretation..