I agree.Your gym is stupid then. Maybe they ought to have stuff like call lists, mailing lists etc.. to ensure customers can get important information.
Let me rephrase: "Twitter shouldn't have the unilateral right to just silence somebody on their own platform, just because they feel like it."They don't. You can hop on Facebook, Instagram, Gab, Parler (if it ever comes back up), Tumblr and half a dozen other more or less famous social media services that provide similar services. Even if you don't want more social media, you are not silenced. You can still use other channels to communicate. You really need to stop pretending as if being excluded from one social media platform is "silencing".
Like I asked Agema:
How would you like it if Russia or China bought of Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc.?
Can you see the potential for harm, there? Could you see how those "platforms" could be misused in order to spread propaganda or suppress truth?
Assuming that you can see the potential for harm, what safeguards do you think should be implemented to protect us from that?
That right there is a barrier to entry that should not be necessary. Like paying a toll before you can enter the town square.All the President needs to do is just make some IT intern create a basic news feed that he can fill with his inane rantings at his pleasure if he desperately wants to do it Twitter style.
Making things less convenient is a tactic of suppression. For example: Voter ID.The word you're looking for is "less convenient", because the President of the United States has plenty of ways to communicate. Once again: The White House has its own website, which it uses to communicate things relating to the President and the governing of the USA.
If you make something harder, there's a chance they'll simply not do that thing anymore, which can be beneficial depending on one's goals.
Or if you'd like, we can use segregation as an analogy. "Use your own water fountain!"