How do you reconcile that with your upstream comment "If society can't trust that private institutions can avoid undesirable behavior, the only recourse is to m

How do you reconcile that with your upstream comment "If society can't trust that private institutions can avoid undesirable behavior, the only recourse is to make everything offensive illegal"? That statement seems to imply that there is a mandate for 3rd parties to provide systems free of "undesirable behavior" from particular perspectives. Freedom of association means no, there isn't. Demanding private institutions provide freedom from offensiveness implies a perceived right not to be offended.