The important part is that it was effectively thrown out for lack of standing. The actual merits of the legal argument that section 230 protects tools like his haven’t been ruled on, because he was suing to preemptively establish his right to build to tool against someone that hadn’t taken any action against him yet.
I do like his argument though.
There’s a place for more formal writing.
But the point of using precise, formal language is the intent behind it. If you’re just RNG-ing it it loses all meaning.