I saw plenty of far out posts under the previous owners too...
But X banned accounts for non-spam content violations at a much higher rate than Twitter and approved content censorship requests from authoritarian states at a higher rate
I assert that Twitter censored less than X, based on the evidence provided by X of how many million more accounts it banned for non-spam policy violations and how much higher its censorship requests compliance was.
And that's the formal policies, never mind the arbitrariness of Elon getting so ban-happy for petulant personal reasons even Paul Graham got a suspension for mentioning Mastodon.
You might prefer mass throttling of any links to news sources the CEO disagrees with over throttling of Scott Adams, but that says more about your personal tastes than the latter moderation policy being a more censorious one
Similarly, it is impossible to argue with a straight face that accounts that reference the existence of an ADS-B feed are somehow a more egregious violation than any of Trump's (remember, the guys in the West Wing he was shouting out to were attempting to violently subvert the democratic process), particularly when you know exactly what an ADS-B feed is, what it does and doesn't show, and how many other websites publish this data.
In this algorithmically recommended world it would be naive enough to think that censorship is as binary as “you can’t say that!” or “now you see it / now you don’t (because we took it down!)” It’s all about the reach these days, i.e. “you can say whatever you want but we control how many people actually see it”:
