Those who exercise free speech should also defend it even when it’s offensive

Re:Those who exercise free speech should also defend it even... by haberman on Thursday June 25, 2020 @05:01AM (#23638443)

I agree that there are almost always some guardrails in place, and certain viewpoints that are considered beyond the pale. And so there is a balancing act between an Overton Window that is too wide and wastes people's time with nonsense, and one that is too narrow and prevents bad orthodoxies from being challenged.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Those who exercise free speech should also defend it even... by TheNorthman on Thursday June 25, 2020 @06:24AM (#23638966)

How are implicit guardrails better than specified guardrails?

Surely explicit guardrails act as therapeutic discourse, in that it seeks to clarify systematic self-deception. By self-deception, I refer first-and-foremost to the myth of objectivity that often surrounds contemporary debate.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Those who exercise free speech should also defend it even... by michaelt on Thursday June 25, 2020 @07:26AM (#23639362)

Because moderators are trying to stop flamewars - not jump into the middle and fight both sides.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Those who exercise free speech should also defend it even... by TheNorthman on Thursday June 25, 2020 @08:40AM (#23639973)

I suppose that's a matter of definition and, in any-case, falls victim to the is-ought problem.

I fail to see why moderators should police tone over content and I'm not convinced this is even the case.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Those who exercise free speech should also defend it even... by Retric on Friday June 26, 2020 @12:12AM (#23648646)

Tone drives people away faster than content. A civil discussion with someone you disagree with is very different than the all caps hate fest you see without any form of moderation.

[ Parent | on HN ]