> that if people want less censorship, because they don't agree with FB banning their version of 'hate speech' - then they can make their own website. But spe

> that if people want less censorship, because they don't agree with FB banning their version of 'hate speech' - then they can make their own website. But specifically this thread and whole article is about people wanting more censorship, on FB. Those people are the ones who can leave, and go make their own website. Everyone else, who supports free speech can stay on facebook. Facebook has enabled significantly more free speech, and democratization of information. That is why people are upset in this thread, and this article. They are upset about how much free speech facebook has enabled. > The 'free speechers' might want to be inclined to allow that to pass The free speechers have already won. This is what people in this thread and article are complaining about. They are upset about how social media has allowed a lot more free speech, and has democratized speech and information to very large degrees. If you don't like how much free speech is on the internet right now, then you are the one who is going to have to create your own website. Because the pro-censorship people are the ones who lost, and are currently very upset about the fact that they lost. Thats the entire point of this article thread.... That people are upset about how much more free speech is available right now, and how much easier it is for people to spread ideas. Those are the people who should leave and make their own platform that has less free speech, if they are upset.