Now imagine what happens when anyone, anywhere has explicit endorsement from the owner of a public Internet forum to post completely unfactual claims on that fo

Now imagine what happens when anyone, anywhere has explicit endorsement from the owner of a public Internet forum to post completely unfactual claims on that forum, under the specious guise of "free speech". Or when "reputable" "news" outlets get to use forum posts as sources for their breaking news (they already do). Imagine how this might revise societal norms also around specious, unfactual claims about racial groups or other segments of the population, to the point where instances of "hate speech" are adjudicated only in the court of public opinion (on a private platform no less, ha, ha). The best outcome for society is for people to stop blindly trusting, or at least be much more skeptical of, what they read on the Internet. This is probably unlikely to happen.