It was always about the kind of speech that was being banned. Movement Democrats like to think of themselves as left-wing, so everything that opposes their party becomes right-wing, including people to the left of them. Movement Democrats weren't being banned for spreading misinformation, they were being encouraged.
> free to harass and insult people, freedom from consequences.
There were only consequences on one side with old twitter.
There's more ways to be outside the Overton window, Horatio, than are dreamed of in your philosophy.
I don't know what you mean by freedom on consequences. I guess a consequence of speech could be to get your account banned? If anything Twitter leaving up your objectionable content would result in more likely conferences of being fired or something.
Objectionable to whom? Elon seems to have no issue blocking speech objectionable to pseudo-dictators[1] or declaring that cis/cisgendered are slurs that can get you suspended. He seems fine with blocking speech objectionable to those that agree with his political sensibilities.
[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/05/13/turkey-...
[1]: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/15/technology/twitter-suspen...
It's not hard to find instances.
Note, I think it's fine for companies to moderate speech on their platforms. No objections there. Just don't simultaneously claim you are some sort of free speech absolutist.
You understand that you were asked for one, right? This is not one, this is a vague claim being repeated.
> he stated that "cis" will be disallowed on the platform
No, he didn't. He said that "cis" being thrown as an insult to people who didn't wish to be called "cis" wouldn't automatically be discounted as harassment. Maybe I'm wrong about this - can you find a single person that was banned or censored by twitter for saying "cis?"
> It's not hard to find instances.
If it's too hard for you to do, why do you expect others to believe you when you say this?