> The issue is that when we abandon the general principle it immediately becomes a question of what speech is ok to ban and this can be weaponized by rivals. T

> The issue is that when we abandon the general principle it immediately becomes a question of what speech is ok to ban and this can be weaponized by rivals. The question of what speech is ok to ban is THE question. I think we all agree there's a line somewhere. I think it's more than one line, it's a bunch of line. Private expression, public expression, public expression for monetary gain (ads), public expression without age-wall, ... > People always imagine themselves or people they agree with in the position of determining what gets banned, but they should imagine their political rival or enemy in that position. No need to imagine, it's what I currently see happening.