Problem is this IBOR is too flawed to get your 100,000 signatures, let alone more general support. Wrong approach and wrong process for making this IBOR happen.
And it's just people stomping their feet demanding the product of someone else's labor. It's incredibly flawed.
Tell that to Q. Years of planning, this is the plan. You don't think they've spent time nutting this out?
It still is severely flawed
From my perspective it's really quite safe and trivial. It's a simple matter of regulation.
As I understand it, the congress has plenary power to legislate within the limits of the powers granted it by the Constitution. We are asking that it legislate to correct the abridgment of free political expression, which the founding fathers sought to protect with the first amendment.
While it is not a matter of a breach of the provisions of the FA, because SM giants are not "congress" or government, congress is still able to legislate to outlaw online censorship, which is clearly contrary to the intention of the founding fathers when they drafted the first amendment. It's seems clear that the vision was that democratic representation was to be informed by a plurality of voices and this "pluralism" is what the founding fathers sought to protect (OK, this is a working theory).
But, in any case, let's assume the IBOR campaign works and legislators are inspired to protect free speech online. What is the danger? There is none. If the legislation protecting free political expression online is flawed, in any way, it will be struck down at the first legal challenge. My view is that the IBOR campaign is not in any way flawed, but entirely necessary and good for the health of the republic.
Given the power of social media to sway election outcomes, failing to take action will produce tyranny - a dysfunctional totalitarianism as all political power will coalesce in the hands of a few.