We want the terms of use to be as thorough as possible. As you point out, because we are global, we want to make sure that the terms of use and our rules are as fair as possible, that they enable speech, and that they prohibit abuse.
You also have different jurisdictions that will prohibit certain types of speech. I will give you the example of Turkey where you cannot criticize Atatürk, the founder of the republic. If you do, then you are in violation of Turkish law, and oftentimes we have to deal with a violation of our rules. When content is reported to us, we will look at whether there is a violation of the rules. If there is, we will take action. If there isn't, but it's a law enforcement or a judicial authority that is bringing it to our attention as violating a local law, then we will then look at whether we can block that content in that country. This is something we will do.
Another good example would be Holocaust denial in Germany. It's illegal in Germany. It's illegal in France. It's illegal in Spain. You will see some tweets that perhaps didn't violate our rules, but that we have blocked in that jurisdiction. The challenge there is how does this scale, and is it ensuring, as we spoke of before, that the law enforcement authorities and the judicial authorities know how to bring this to our attention.
Some organizations that are non-profit also do have a government mandate to bring hate speech to the attention of platforms like ours. That is the case of Jugendschutz in Germany, or the diversity centres in Belgium, or the Movimiento contra la Intolerancia in Spain. We will work with them on that, too.