and i've wasted the morning being pedantic to someone. what a pointless endeavor this was.

basically just came down to i don't support any propagation of "X is not 'speech', that way i can avoid saying i'm against free speech."

it's okay to be against free speech. you may get spaced or airlocked for that belief but you believe actions have consequences anyway.

but moderation

yeah but that was always allowed. government speech provisions were there to protect the town square. the problem is just when a corpo takes over the town square and starts being hyper partisan with rules enforcement.

@icedquinn

Penises are not speech, therefore rape is not an expression of free speech

@freemo penises are not speech this is true. but it's also not what the problem is.

the problem is speech protections are there to stop the government from jailing you for having opinions the government deems to be wrongthink.

because people are failures at this whole constitutional republic concept, judges legislated from the bench that "if we just say it's not speech we can ban it."

well no, they can't, and those people are committing treason. problem is people now have bought in to this idea that there exists 'protected' and 'unprotected' speech, which actually even that is more coherent but its still derived from rulings claiming certain speech "isn't speech."

basically its a circumvention on the ban of wrongthink laws by claiming wrongthink isn't thought so the rule on thinking can't ban it.

i still agree that a private chat group is free to go "being racist is off topic" as long as its enforced coherently. i just don't agree wiith propagating the mind virus we can just reclassify bananas as apples for tax reasons.

@icedquinn I mean, there is a type of spoken expression that I'd argue isnt speech in the sense of free speech, but I also agree that is a very dangerous and slippery slope.

Deaming that screaming "fire" in a theater is not protected by free speech is something I find perfectly acceptable.

@freemo the judge who made that ruling regretted it.

i saw someone worked out the answer to this is to sue that person for fraud.

@icedquinn cant sue someone for fraud if its protected as free speech either.. luckily fraud is not protected by free speech either (its a verbal contract and contracts arent free-speech protected).

@freemo individual states aren't covered by absolute speech protection. only congress is prohibited.

@icedquinn how ya figure.. states and their citizens are beholden to the constitution.

@freemo

Congress shall enact no law abridging freedom of speech nor of the press

because that’s what it says.