I’m not an insane Free Speech abolitionist, but I support Free Speech. There is a limit, and there are consequences of unlimited free speech.
Too much free speech, like you;re trying to support, is JUST as bad as extreme censorship.
I didn’t mention free speech once in my post, I just stated that your conclusion that anyone who takes issue with the post has to be pro-nazi and anti-communist is coming either from the prospective of trying to provoke or it showcases a mindset of not being able to comprehend the idea of defending something you disagree with or don’t partake in. My point was that regardless of why you stated what you did that it was built on a flawed way of thinking. I didn’t say anything about free speech, to me this isn’t a free speech issue. But rather to me this is the most illegitimate way of dealing with actual problems in the fandom and instead is a rule built around improving reputation rather than improving the quality of the site. Fundamentally the media targeted a 0.14% (lower than most artists) of content out of 100% on the site and suddenly we’re meant to believe there’s a Nazi pandemic or suddenly we’re meant to care about our reputation from the very same people who tried to implicate bronies as paedos 9 years ago and who will always move the goal posts no matter what the community does.
To me it’s like in school when someone disowns their friend group to befriend people who don’t care about them only to realise their new friends just want to call them names. Considering the reputations of gossip papers like Atlantic &
The New York Post who are commenting on it, I just think that judging reputation should go both ways. We should just be able to dismiss gossip websites as just that like we did 9 years ago rather than acting like everything being said is legitimate. For me the call to action is extremely flawed, everything pitched since has been extremely flawed and every attempt of resolve has backfired. I don’t agree with what’s happening, why it’s happening or how. I like logical arguments not ones based on fear-mongering, hysteria and gossip and I’ve yet to see a logical argument that proves to me that there is a fundamental logical reason to pursue this approach that doesn’t break down when you try to apply it as a general rule or to other existing media. Noticed how ‘free speech’ doesn’t factor in for me personally - But that does highlight a flaw in jumping to conclusions.