Let me reword what I originally wrote for clarity so we can understand how this part got misinterpreted:

IANAL but there's suppose to be a blurb in there about not exercising too much control over the content (actually i was wrong about this, as it was about) [moderating in good faith]. The more moderating decisions the admins get involved in, the greater the [chance] in going afoul of this. Once the company has editorial control [is deemed to not be moderating in good faith], they lose the Section 230 protections [for that or those particular moderating decisions].