In other words, we're dealing with over-sensitive people on the internet? Children, because those are the only ones that cannot accept the truth. And, since everyone is so easily offended, they have to be protected by content editing?
No one in their right minds would spend a dime for an easily offended person. If this done, there are things at play here.
> Also the amount of taboos seem to correlate with hostility for some reason.
I noticed that too.
Mark Robinson's historic posts on internet forums clearly demonstrate the hypocrisy and self loathing and psychological projection that's really going on with people like you.
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/09/19/politics/kfile-mark-robin...
At least Mark Robinson has the gumption to post that shit under his own name. If you truly believe and stand by and think you can justify what you say, then you should give it a try, anonymous coward keyboard warrior.
Everywhere that allows free speech now has an angle. Some hide it better than others, and people can't see it.
HN is friendly to freedom of speech because the site probably doesn't attract people that are easy to act out when offended or those that like to report people whose content they do not like. Or because of the occasional comment that refocuses a discussion again.
I would even argue that some more strongly moderated sites can often even be larger cesspools. You can go to Instagram and say something negative about the next random pop start or influencer and people are going to get extremely vicious. Far more so than a message board with only anonymous users.
Also the amount of taboos seem to correlate with hostility for some reason.