If he wishes to support free speech, as he so often claims, then yes, that carries that obligation. But he clearly does not actually care about free speech.
Any non-abserd definition of free speech concerns the expression of ideas rather than allowing hyperlinks to competitor platforms. I don't see this as a violation of free speech at all
Bookmarking this comment to remind myself in the future how far people will twist their logic to fit their narrative. Thank you for making this so clear for me.
