But again, in the absolutism of free speech, you're ignoring things like violent threats and racial slurs. And when you do that, you end up with something like 4Chan. Most people don't go there, for good reason.
And what consequence does someone who makes a lot of sock puppet accounts to send oven memes to Jewish people face? Pretty much none. Yet, those people are still faced with that constantly, and as a result, they choose not to engage. Now you've silenced their right to speech.
TBH, on Twitter (like on Facebook) you ultimately see posts from people you choose to follow. If you follow idiots, don't be surprised to see idiotic things. If you follow hateful people, don't be surprised to see hateful things.
That was the case until the @reply. Plus you probably don't want your followers to see idiots responding to your posts, unless they're following those idiots
It turns out, though, that lots of people you’d want to follow for interesting content also take a break from interesting, insightful, or funny tweets to have vitriolic rants.
Perhaps then the rules should enforce some sort of "theme" policy. I.e. if you're a gaming account, it has to stick to gaming content, etc. If it's political commentary, sure, and so forth. It might be difficult, but probably more do-able than the nebulous "abuse" rules that they currently have.
Really, it's what I hoped FB would turn into. I.e. you had "themed" pages, and follow them for posts regarding that theme. However, it seems that what happens is if a page and it's admins start getting any non-negligible amount of followers, they decide that it's their "right" to use it as a platform for opinions on unrelated matters. It's quite frustrating.
And what consequence does someone who makes a lot of sock puppet accounts to send oven memes to Jewish people face? Pretty much none. Yet, those people are still faced with that constantly, and as a result, they choose not to engage. Now you've silenced their right to speech.