@freepeoplesfreepress @freemo Strongly disagree. Companies are just collectives of people, and they have the right to free speech as well. On their property, they should be able to control the narrative and tone; that's their speech right. Just as it's our right to leave their property if we don't like the way they run things.
Free speech doesn't mean a right to compel others to host your speech.
@LouisIngenthron @freepeoplesfreepress @freemo I agree in so far that nobody should be compelled to host others speech.
But with that comes the question "what is this platform?".
Mastodon is a utility, Facebook is a money generating machine that cares not one bit for my needs.
If Mastodon goes too far into promoting the hosting peoples views instead of being a platform for users to exchange ideas, i will leave. And i hope others judge this similarly, any small group in control of the opinions of many is dangerous.
🇳🇱
I dont think money has too much to do with the topic at hand directly.
Mastodon is designed that no matter hyow large it becomes it would never be an issue since no one can or does control the whole thing.. Only way I could see a commons arising is if there is a megaserver in a few years with 80+ of the fediverse on it, then that one instance might be a commons but otherwise the whole network, no.
That said in such a network we may have a good argument to say that relays must be open to all parties if they are public.
@freemo @LouisIngenthron @freepeoplesfreepress Yes, with Masto i don't see the money angle becoming a problem, but depending on groups that defederate, some might gain control of what opinions are ok.
I said if, and i meant on the off chance a thought police establishes power.
@admitsWrongIfProven @freemo @freepeoplesfreepress So long as the "thought police's" power extends only as far as their own property, and I'm free to not be on their property, they can exist all they want. 🤷♂️ Doesn't bother me how they rule their own slice of paradise.