FleurDeLis, over at (https://poal.co/s/Announcements/7986/667426e8-838f-43b9-af31-d11ca92c0004#cmnts) writes *Obscenity isn't free speech, it isn't protected by the constitutions 1st amendment. Targeted harassment again, does not constitute free speech. The right to offend others exists but not the right to intimidate, provoke into silence.* and raises an interesting point. As the announcement itself says, using 'freedom of speech' to limit others freedom isn't free speech at all. A system cannot long exist that tolerates things which act under that system to undermine or destroy it. Others, as shills like to do, compared it to twitter and reddit, but we know that comparison isn't true because twitter and reddit censor opinions that are merely opinions, rather than attempts to destroy or undermine the platforms, though they often, laughably succeed at censoring legit opinions, while failing to censor the latter, effectively undermining themselves. This goes back to a dichotomy not often talked about: Liberty and Freedom are not synonyms. Liberty is freedom with duties and responsibilities. Freedom is liberty without duties and responsibilities. When we live in Liberty, we have various liberties, but have the duty to exercise them in such a way that it doesn't impinge on other's liberties. When we live in Freedom, we do whatever the hell we want, even if it destroys other's freedoms. And never the twain shall meet.