4 ms·
Most responses were zingers or did not show a basic understanding for what he said. They are noise, and noise is not worth defending. Surely you see the proble
by _pius 14y ago
Most responses were zingers or did not show a basic understanding for what he said. They are noise, and noise is not worth defending.
Surely you see the problem with that line of argument.
His piece was hardly insightful. In fact, he did not show a basic understanding of the issues he was pontificating on and the piece was mere noise, not worth defending by anyone.
Once you start trying to parse out who's right, you're missing the point of free speech aren't you?
- ynniv 14y agoYou're pandering, but you do raise the point that I should have said "worth considering". All speech is worth defending as free, but our time in life is limited and we must each be selective about what we spend it on. Whether or not you appreciated his post, it is probably a waste of your time to make shallow, unsubstantiated comments regarding it.
- _pius 14y agoFor what it's worth, I'm not pandering ... that's more or less how I feel about his piece. But the point is, neither you nor I can have it both ways: free speech isn't just about protecting speech we like or think is substantive.