@longjon,
You are being silly Longjon.
1. I agree with the settlement paid to Nicholas Sandmann. The Washington Post did defame him.
2. The lawsuit was defamation. It was based on something that the Washington Post published. It was because this story
wasn't censored. It had nothing to do with section 230.
3. We don't know what the settlement was.... if you think it was $250 million, you are living in a fantasy world. It is not even clear that the Post would have lost the case had it gone to trial, in fact the judge pushed back on the prosecution to narrow the scope of the case. It is likely he got something like $20 or $50 thousand. Of course we don't know.