I think the issue, if there ever becomes a protocol allowing for full freedom of speech, is that of time-resource management: if you know a certain user just isn't responsive or open to listening to reason - closed heart, closed mind - blind in rage like the boar demons in Princess Mononoke. I believe there needs to be a system to tag such individuals and then some sort of intervention in-person - we're not going to work through people's anger and build trust, relationship, with them online. I think that also then requires developing a culture - so "sheep" following the new status quo - of a protocol to help people develop their self-awareness - to gain and maintain their health, which in part is to heal past trauma that closed off their heart and mind, blocking their critical thinking and empathy development.

So you're claiming that freedom of speech creates an obligation to listen?

No, freedom of speech is about the government censoring your ability of speech. You are free to stand on a street corner and yell to the world but it does not require anyone to listen to you.

This person is advocating for a non-governmental website that is for enabling free speech since they see some voices as being silenced. But with that comes the ability for people you disagree with the speak as well. No government censored Parler, it was people who disagreed. What if this new service is overrun with people who disagree, will it be swept away in shadow posts or will people who say disagreeable things actually see that.