I could have quoted almost any of the sentences in this reply to make the same point, but I'll go with this one.

What are you basing this claim on? Seriously, I suspect your first instinct will be to get mad at me for asking this question, but ask yourself, honestly, "how do I know this?"

I would be the first person to be shouting this from the rooftops if it were true. I'd be grateful to you for opening my eyes if you had even the slightest evidence that your ratio was right here. Even if it were a ten to one ratio of "good/bad" posts.

So do you? Is there a single thing except feelings and vibes you can point to? Do you have a leaked report or internal data that supports your claim?

(Note, I'm not talking about government interference here, which is a real but separate problem. I'm talking specifically about this claim about fact checkers. Trump's administration made takedown requests too, though Musk chose not to highlight that, and Twitter complies with more takedown requests under Musk than it did under Dorsey, but fact checking is something else.)

Because if you don't have any evidence, and I suspect you don't, this is an absolutely perfect example of the problem I'm pointing to.

How do you decide who you can trust? Why are you no longer sure if you can trust me? You don't have to trust me, of course, I spend so much time adding sources to my posts so you don’t have to blindly take my word for things, but the metrics you're using matter. It can't be just, "this opinion does/doesn't make me feel good." Or "I don't like those guys for reasons I can't really explain."

Once you move past believing that you need to be able to prove your answer, that's when you're in 2 + 2 = 5 territory. It isn't about left vs right, it's about thinking vs feeling.