One might say that if a law is so misunderstood by so many and has an outcome that so many would disagree with then it should be replaced based on that fact alone, as what is more dangerous to a society than laws which rule over them that are misunderstood to such a great degree (this might be said of many other laws too). You can blame the people but we install law makers to produce good laws not bad ones (I wouldn't blame the users for not using my app the way I envisaged because they're ignorant, I'd hope I'd improve the app).

But what should replace it? Perhaps something that does make the distinction between what is a platform and a publisher. That could be difficult.

I'd most likely go for something tapered, so that smaller sites had more protections / less responsibilities and larger sites less protection/more responsibility, in order to promote competition because I think lack of competition is the main problem. So if small sites retained section 230 protection and larger sites didn't, perhaps that would produce better outcomes. Thus, I'm completely against stamping down on Parler and Gab, and any other upstart in the space. The more competitors the better, in my view.