You're giving way more than the benefit of the doubt here, if I had to guess I'd say you are doing it willfully. At least you acknowledge your bias so credit wh

You're giving way more than the benefit of the doubt here, if I had to guess I'd say you are doing it willfully. At least you acknowledge your bias so credit where credit is due I guess. Accusing someone of saying something they didn't say is called "libel" or "slander" depending on the medium with which it is done. To call that out, publish it, and for people to enjoy that published work, that is a far cry away from having a stated mission to go after, expose and deplatform people sharing ideas you do not like. You use the word "cancelling" much more liberally than it's contemporary definition applies, I'd say you're stretching it beyond its elasticity in order to make an argument that doesn't exist to defend an indefensible act.