but it does make the poster responsible for his postings, not the web site.
of course, the site has some obligations it has to live up to in order to qualify for this protection. It's the difference between a publisher and a platform. The really big problem with 230 is the single phrase "otherwise objectionable", which lets the site exercise far more "editorial judgement" in what they remove than they are supposed to and still qualify for the protection.
It's easy to read:
The word "indemnify" does not appear in the entire document.
Paragraph #14 is:
4. Parler cannot waive any right to enforce this User Agreement, unless it does so
expressly in writing. No waiver of any part of this User Agreement, will be a further or
continuing waiver of that part or any other part, and no failure to enforce any part of his
User Agreement will be deemed a waiver of any kind.