3 ms·

I'm tired of this bad take: > What about freedom of speech? This has nothing to do with Freedom of Speech - the government is not limiting what can be said.

I'm tired of this bad take: > What about freedom of speech? This has nothing to do with Freedom of Speech - the government is not limiting what can be said. There's plenty of other speech opportunities, as shown by the channel already moving to another network. You have no (US) rights to force a platform to host you. At best (worst?), they are breaching a contract and you can sue them for damages but I don't know if any channels actually signed such contracts with Freenode?

blendergeek 5y ago
Nobody mentioned the government. A platform can choose to allow free speech or not. GP seems to be advocating for free-er speech on IRC platforms, including speech critical of the hosts or supporting competitors.
- ddingus 5y ago
  A platform secure in its dealings, that has garnered solid mutual respect and consideration has few worries about critics and thus no real reason to worry about critique. Solid criticism can be acted on and that adds use value for everyone. Not solid, or unjust criticism will be judged collectively and just is not a major concern.
ddingus 5y ago
It is a free speech matter. Not First Amendment style, and yes because we are discussing private entities. And in this case, a private entity formed post fact. Arguably, an entity without a solid basis, but I digress... The people makin things work built trust, culture and in those things, high value. Use value, not dollar value. (Another point against the private entity basis) Of major importance is the idea of this work being done because it is necessary. That trust matters and so does the speech being carried along side. The trust was broken, and what was before a place where all parties could speak freely is now a place where speech is regulated and said regulation is not to the mutual benefit, consideration and respect of everyone involved. Consideration due is consideration given. Freenode understands how all that works. Leenode does not. And the lack of consideration and respect at times is a direct function of consideration and respect not given. And here we are watching it all play out terribly. The only one forcing is Leenode. Remember that.

blendergeek 5y ago

Nobody mentioned the government. A platform can choose to allow free speech or not. GP seems to be advocating for free-er speech on IRC platforms, including speech critical of the hosts or supporting competitors.

ddingus 5y ago
A platform secure in its dealings, that has garnered solid mutual respect and consideration has few worries about critics and thus no real reason to worry about critique. Solid criticism can be acted on and that adds use value for everyone. Not solid, or unjust criticism will be judged collectively and just is not a major concern.

ddingus 5y ago

It is a free speech matter. Not First Amendment style, and yes because we are discussing private entities. And in this case, a private entity formed post fact. Arguably, an entity without a solid basis, but I digress... The people makin things work built trust, culture and in those things, high value. Use value, not dollar value. (Another point against the private entity basis) Of major importance is the idea of this work being done because it is necessary. That trust matters and so does the speech being carried along side. The trust was broken, and what was before a place where all parties could speak freely is now a place where speech is regulated and said regulation is not to the mutual benefit, consideration and respect of everyone involved. Consideration due is consideration given. Freenode understands how all that works. Leenode does not. And the lack of consideration and respect at times is a direct function of consideration and respect not given. And here we are watching it all play out terribly. The only one forcing is Leenode. Remember that.