Good, just because you may have the right to free speech doesn't mean you should be given a platform to spread your hate.
The best I can tell is that he can be an asshole.
Bit odd for you to be so concerned about making up your own mind, yet be so reliant on other people providing you sources.
Besides, I have taken a preliminary look; Milo seems to be an outspoken asshole (and thus poisoning the discourse), but not an outright hateful bigot... feel free to provide evidence to the contrary.
What do you think this is, Reddit?
This is a good characterization of the media's overall response to twitter's banning of Milo. Everyone just keeps saying "he's a terrible person" in dozens of different forms - some rather extreme - but rarely is any real evidence presented. If they present any evidence at all, they cherry pick and take things out of context.
Why should I protect someone calling Leslie Jones an ape? And do NOT say to simply "ignore it" or to "log off". None of that works. It doesn't stop it, and asking someone in the public eye to not use social media is basically telling them to not have a career.
This isn't a blow to free speech. It's Twitter deciding not to let someone use its service and its resources for the purposes of rallying racists to berate an innocent woman who acted in a movie.
Banning someone from Twitter is one of the least effective ways to censor an author who has multiple venues which pay them to write. As the linked comic says (I can't believe nobody has linked to it yet, so the obligatory XKCD is below) this is not censorship. This is signaling that his speech was inappropriate and harassment. Being banned from Twitter doesn't stop him from posting on e.g. Facebook. His speech can still be heard by any who want to hear it, this ban merely prevents him from harassing her further.
On the contrary, private censorship is essential to the marketplace of ideas, since it is exactly private parties choosing how they will participate in that marketplace.
(Where a "private" entity -- or a group of them coordinating formally or informally -- has a, de facto or de jure, protected monopoly on communication in a market, then that entity or entities censoring raises much the same issues as government censorship, but private censorship in general is central to, rather than destructive of, the open marketplace of ideas.)