I really like this post. These are lessons I learned a long time ago, when I was 10 or so running web forums. But there are three big things this misses: 1. W

I really like this post. These are lessons I learned a long time ago, when I was 10 or so running web forums. But there are three big things this misses: 1. What is and is not legal is usually decided in the courts. That's expensive, and lawyers help prevent you from getting to the courts in the first place. 2. The ideal goal for good discussion on a forum is transparency and consistency in moderation. For example, StackExchange sites censor heavily, but with a good effort to be transparent and consistent in doing so. (This is the major flaw with most "free speech" sites-- they make no effort whatsoever. It's just buzzword branding.) 3. When you're beholden to shareholders, then the goal for discussion is to be profitable. Free-speech ideals matter *only* to the extent that they are profitable. You'll generally find the ideals in point 2 on small social media sites (up to ~1000 monthly users who make posts). These are ones where the active users all know one another, and where it's feasible for a user to read and respond to all the posts made on the site. (If you're nostalgic for mid-2000s webforums, then good news: They still exist!) Crucially, these are sites meant to serve a need for community, with no intention of profit. These are sites small enough that the social dynamics are closer to a discord server or group chat. It's easy to tell when good members are or not acting in good faith, and it's feasible for the admins/mods to openly discuss moderation decisions.