How do you mean “the other side?” EFF has a high factuality/credibility but is marked as left of center in bias.
EFF, like ACLU, are mostly orgs that stick to their expertise. Look at entities rated as “Very High.” The climate science orgs don’t and shouldn’t give time entertaining the deranged conspiracy theories of science deniers, nor should EFF focus on advancing rhe worldviews of entities looking to limit speech on the internet. It would be like demanding AA set aside time at meetings to discuss the merits of getting black out drunk once in a while.
Sure, many sides exist. But mere existence doesn’t make them equal.
my experience is such that people don't get these sweeping bans for having opinions. They get them for acting like sociopathic aggressive individuals.
And based on what I'm seeing when I check folks' profiles reiterating the same story... Yep it checks out more often than not. There's no discourse on the internet when it consists of calling people slurs in a weird barrage of insults. Those are the people who get banned here or there.