> This is diametrically opposed to the First Amendment’s intent. No, it wasn't. The assumption at the time was _money_ was the only barrier to distribution. M

> This is diametrically opposed to the First Amendment’s intent. No, it wasn't. The assumption at the time was _money_ was the only barrier to distribution. Much like the reasoning behind Citizen's United (as much as I loathe that decision). And the problem here isn't really the OP, but the fact I find it scary people are happy with the idea that they are comfortable with Visa/Mastercard/Amex being able to deplatform _anyone_ on the internet in the US. And before you claim that is hyperbole keep in mind: A) They've cut other companies ability to process credit cards for speech-related reasons. B) Any registrar or hosting company would cease to exist if they did this. The only real exceptions are Amazon & Google who could realistically defend themselves due to size. And given both are willing to de-platform the same types of people the credit card companies will, it has been a non-issue to date. So yeah, I'm not comfortable with that. It isn't that I'm a fan of Nazis and Racists. Its this constant attack on free speech isn't "just" about Nazis and Racists. Its about words on the internet that offend people. https://www.forbes.com/2003/05/01/cz_sl_0501porn.html https://www.forbes.com/2003/05/01/cz_sl_0501porn.html https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/payment-processors-are-still-policing-your-sex-life https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/payment-processors-are... I'd much prefer a situation where first amendment protections were built into financial processing, domains, etc.