You seem to be replying to a comment that I didn't write. I said nothing whatsoever about what the most extreme sort of punishment for speech is or about the maximal extent to which speech can be restricted. I certainly never suggested that being banned from twitter is either of those things.

Do you think Twitter should be forced to provide a platform for all speech with no exceptions?

If not, what exceptions do you think should be allowed?

But, it is correct to say that being banned from social media severely restricts one's ability to participate. In addition, banning has a significant effect on anyone aware of the ban.

It's important to learn from the mistakes of ____(some worse country), so that we don't continue in the direction of ____.

I never understood the sarcastic, smarmy, dismissive tone people take when talking about these kinds of issues.

The parent poster obviously was not implying getting banned on Twitter is in any way similar to the government imprisoning you for your speech, yet you straw-man him while being on some kind of unearned intellectual high-horse.

He is, however, stating the fact that being banned from the platform is having your ability to participate in discourse removed or limited. While the platform may have the right to do so, it doesn't change the fact that there are varying degrees of censorship, and it's not the black-and-white "prosecution/execution or nothing."

The real problem here is the SIZE of the social media companies.