I don't think people like that are missing the point. AFAIK the concept of platforms vs. publishers with regard to liability comes from a misunderstanding of S230. Some people got attached to the idea and have backfilled a moral position, but I still think it's worth pointing out that it stems from a misunderstanding.

To me, the position that a platform cannot morally moderate some content without incurring liability for all other content is rather extreme and the precepts are non-obvious. Presumably you mean moral liability rather than legal liability? Can you elaborate on the precepts here?

* what does moral liability mean? is the platform equally morally liable as the poster, or is the liability split between them? * where does this liability attach? how big do you have to be, or how much of a hand to you have to play in dissemination of content to incur moral liability? * and finally, why does choosing to moderate some content but not others change the moral calculus? This is totally non-obvious to me and TBH doesn't make a lot of sense.