Doing so is essentially a hallmark of a society. Laws against fraud, for example, are among the oldest in existence, despite fraud overwhelmingly targeting the most credulous among us (for obvious reasons). This is a good thing, actually.

> Doing so is essentially a hallmark of a society.

would this imply something is not right with our society because there aren't laws against listening to joe rogan.

Nope! It implies that yes, someone should think of the credulous people.

I don’t believe censoring Rogan is justified/wise/useful/etc. — even if it were it’d still be illegal anyway. But does that mean I think we should just throw credulous folks to the wolves with snarky remarks like “won’t someone think of the credulous people?!”

We should think of the credulous people, and take society’s threats against them and their threat to society seriously.