Contradicting the official narrative on Covid19 isn't automatically 'misinformation', the official narrative held that masks are useless in the first months, th

Contradicting the official narrative on Covid19 isn't automatically 'misinformation', the official narrative held that masks are useless in the first months, then insisted on it religiously the following months, when, in fact, they are indeed mostly useless in the face of latest variants. Both of those convictions were held against evidence, and intelligent and knowledgeable commenters and organizations tried to point out what was wrong in them only to be met by "debonking" and censorship. Reality is not harassment. If somebody is upset they can't control someone's else words or perception, they can go to therapy about it. This remains true even if you invent a couple of dumb words to describe the words or perceptions that upset you, like 'deadnaming' or 'misgendering'. There is a difference between deliberate selectivity based on ideology, clearly and nakedly what twatter does, and simple errors and human variability. Yes, I'm entirely free to think anything I want and disparage any website or any other group\institution of people for not agreeing with me, and being happy that dumb anti-free-speechers are dragged to court and toyed with for months. What I don't understand is how your dumb role-playing of an imagined strawman of me in your first reply says anything about me or my opinions.