Speak for yourself

i spoke for nobody. neither myself nor you or anyone else. and machines can't speak or hold opinions, so i can't speak for them either

I wonder how much internet-argument bandwidth would be saved if we used different words for "freedom from" vs "freedom to", instead of putting both things on a single scale and then arguing over which is "more free"...

It's a matter of perspective and what you perceive to be the default. Freedom from prevention of X is Freedom to not do X.

Machines are tools used by humans. Codeberg has banned a certain class of tool.

as is their right, and the wish of a very significant chunk of their users. you're still free to use other platforms.

"free to use other platforms" doesn't mean that Codeberg is a "free" platform.

might as well say Google is a free Git alternative because you're free to use another one since you can't use it for git

I don't know what this means. Is close source software open because you're free to use other software?

So if I'm not free to use a hammer, that's actually not a constriction of my freedom because "the hammer neither wants nor needs freedom"?

That's like saying you're free to build your own shed, as long as you don't use hammers. Hammers don't need nor want freedom.