"Censorship" just forces people underground to talk amongst other people with the same opinions. While it has some kind of measurable effect on preventing impressionable people from being exposed to their opinions, it also prevents people from discussing alternative views with the ones who were "censored". This is a large part of the reason why everyone was blindsided by Trump, the trump supporters were largely either not speaking up due to social penalties for doing so or only talking on-line in forums where other people agreed with them.
If the goal is to "defeat" the alt-right movement, then I don't think it is necessarily obvious that banning them is the right move. As I said though, maybe it is since it does limit exposure to their views which in theory limits their membership.
Note: Scare quoted censorship due to it not being government run which is what people usually mean when they say censorship.
Every site in the world, if they don't want to be a cesspool full of trolls and baiters, will have to moderate.
This is the key takeaway IMO
> Like the mod said in his own words, they are not interested in public policy, they are focused on white nationalist racial discussion. To continue on that course without steering into hate speech is impossible.
the first amendment is an application of that philosophy codified into law.
a company can by choose choose to value the philosophy of free speech, independent of the law.
you cannot use the phrases "freedom of speech" and "the first amendment" interchangeably.
Until it elects the sort of people who want to see me deported into positions of power. At which point am I obligated to hand them a free platform again?
I don't see why the admins don't just edit the posts? No need to ban things.
