2 ms·
The argument, as I understand it, is that disabling someone's ability to do speech is categorically censorship.
by kelseyfrog 4y ago
The argument, as I understand it, is that disabling someone's ability to do speech is categorically censorship.
- klyrs 4y agoSure, call it censorship. I maintain that it's legally permissible to ban shit-posters for misconduct. I'd further argue that failing to ban shit-posters will dissuade 3d printing enthusiasts from using a particular forum, granting the shit-posters a heckler's veto which is its own form of censorship.