My framing isn't to actively exclude people like some stuck up gatekeeper. Its to stop lowering the bar of entry to anyone who wants to shoot off their dumb opi

My framing isn't to actively exclude people like some stuck up gatekeeper. Its to stop lowering the bar of entry to anyone who wants to shoot off their dumb opinions online has to expend at least a little effort and brainpower to get there. Lowering the bar to allow even the most willfully tech illiterate to effortlessly post on places like twitter guarantee tragedy of the commons. Compare the R/C plane hobby before and after Drones hit the market. Before quadcopter drones, R/C aircraft were difficult to fly and required an investment of time and discipline to master the skill. This meant the community was fairly small and dedicated. And it was able to effectively self govern for decades with basically no government intervention required. Then quadcopters hit the market and it took not even 10 years before the FAA had to intervene because idiots who had no skill or respect for the technology were flying around airports, public gatherings and other restricted areas. Even though things practically fly themselves they were crashing into people and their property. There were serious injuries because they were flown by morons. So the FAA had to step in and become the gatekeeper. Is crashing a drone into a person's car or a child the same as idiots on social media? No, but irresponsible use of social media has ruined plenty of people's lives. The connect isn't as obvious but the damage is still there. We haven't started requiring social media licenses because speech is a protected right of course. And we shouldn't change that. But that means there should be some social responsibility.