The big mistake here is trying to come up with a single code by which to codify speech. I mean, a government (even one supporting free speech) has to do this, because they're the enforcer of last resort, and it's really necessary that such a code promulgated by the government err on the side of being "too permissive".

But-- we should have big markets of many participants who all make their own decisions about what they condone. Then, the individual decisions are not so toxic. And if you are doing something egregious where almost all of them say no, well, you got what you deserved.

My personal thoughts: exposing peoples' personal information for the explicit purpose of severe and illegal harassment is on the "definitely not OK" side of things. Ordinary hate speech that occasionally leads to spree violence is much murkier.

Honestly, it depends on what that property is and if the person went on a killing spree based on their views on property X or for other reasons.

If Property X is something like the color of their skin, their sexuality, their gender, etc, then I would support cloudflare banning them.

I am certainly not the master of what should and should not be on the internet, and neither should cloudflare. As a society, though, there are some things that most can agree on.