The three reasons for the fine are:
* Lack of transparency / misleading verified checkmarks
* Lack of open data access
* Lack of any ad transparency showing who paid to show which ads
None of those are censorship. All of those are basic good governance and transparency.
The censorship angle is nothing but FUD by an admin terrified of good governance and transparency.
Personally, I'd like to know who is trying to steer the conversation, in light of psyop campaigns and hybrid warfare against our democracy.
I'd also like researchers to be able to examine how a large public forum is run.
Again, transparency is the name of the game.
What use is that information to governments, if not to guide their censorship efforts? It's a setup for labelling your opposition as "hybrid warfare" combatants, not because they picked up a gun but rather because they're saying things you think shouldn't be said.
What X is scared of is showing that @AlabamaMAGALady and @DeutscherPatriot are based in St. Petersburg.
Again, there is no censorship. Just a transparency requirement.