I’d offer that I heard Jack say he was forced into the ban, in the way market dynamics force an outcome. Twitter was/is a for profit business that needs advertising revenue $ to exist and the implication was the advertisers required this action of the company or they would stop funding. Separately I’d add that any public/private business can take whatever actions it wants (ideally conforming to reasonable laws) so I find it a bit odd to imply that there’s some requirement that one of the executives who helped make those company decisions should be required to feel remorse / guilt /apologize if those decisions look bad in hindsight - even if that executive agreed the decision looked bad in hindsight which I’m guessing in this case is not true. These are hard decisions and Jack seems to be marching towards freedom and truth so I think cutting him some slack here is fair.