They didn't suspend his account because they were being biased by treating him differently from other users. So now they are being a little less biased. They just flagged another of his tweets for glorifying violence. Eventually they will have flagged enough to get him suspended and eventually banned. And if Trump tries to take it to court he will fail because Twitter has tons of evidence they have been biased for him all these years.

Yeah they make money from Trump but you have to wonder how much it also costs them in resources to host him both in expenses and lost revenue.

PS. If you know what a blog is you know what Twitter - same thing but with lots of people posting and way more reading and commenting. Oh and the blog posts have to be 280 characters long max. And yes that's characters not words, including punctuation.

Twitter makes money through selling advertising (see first link). Trump will make money after his Presidency by monetizing his account (see second link). He is fighting to prevent being exposed as a liar because he will lose followers.

[bbc.com]

[thewisdompost.com]

I’ve nothing to do with it either … and not so long ago had to ask someone (yet again) how’s it work I think I ‘get it,’ but haven’t the least desire to wade through the assumed shitpile of ‘tweets’ from even those of interest.. Here is bad enough

Think I heard it described that trump has brought the Twiter system more attention and ‘legitimacy’ than it would have had without him… So they’ve tolerated him.. Using it appears his Narcissistic method of avoiding the age old expectation that Presidents give press conferences - and take questions. He’s incapable of that ..so he plays with his phone, alone.

Now that he is directly attacking them mabey they will...

because. LOL I have no clue either. Though twitter did start doing a fact check thing that has the manbaby in a complete uproar. So that's fun to watch.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a 1996 law that is considered foundational to the internet's expansion. The statute provides platforms legal immunity for content posted by third-party users while also giving them legal cover to make good-faith efforts to moderate their platforms.

If social media were to 'censor', they would likely not have the protections.