Yes you’re right about public image and a company wanting to preserve it. And I might be a little hyperbolic about what I’m saying. But really if it was just public image along with their ads, they would delete/(stop using) all of their accounts to show that they didn’t want anything to do with Twitter as long as they had hateful content on there.

I was using the context of the main post and responses.

Most things are done in averages when you’re talking about a large population so the average doses between sexes are different that was the first part the second part is the averages of physical differences between sexes, so my bad I it seem like I was putting the two together. And my overall point is that it’s not I was born a male and feel/mentally that I’m female or vice versa, it’s morphed into I am what I claim to be regardless of these averages and differences between the two sexes, don’t question me, which can lead to adverse effects when it comes to your dosage in medication’s, and the differences in weight classes and bone and muscle density.

The mainstream news didn’t want to talk about it because mostly white people were affected. Discrimination is discrimination no matter the race.

The issue is when it comes to medicine doses between males and females and biological advantages, and disadvantages between those two sexes.

First my point was to prove Elon had a point that most, not all, corporations are bad and out to get him. We ended up on different economic systems and their associations to government and business. Finally you proved my point that some corporations are bad, so in my opinion these companies that have it out for Elon, Rumble, and other free speech platforms should be looked at for the real reason for them pulling ads in a colluding manner.

You feel you know it all but are unable to prove where I’m incorrect with facts and not your opinion in doing so haven’t proven anything.

There are less insiders working with these companies, X is trying to be neutral, and is trying not to be beholden to outside forces so I would have to disagree with you.

Only thing I can say is we’ll see how it plays out in court I could be wrong, but at the end of the day we’re just bench sitters in all this

What’s there to say at this point other then just to say we can agree to disagree.

Limited government regulation

Elaborate please.