Posts: 44
Threads: 42
Joined: Jul 2023
Do you think there should be limits to what is considered free speech? Is there a fine line between free speech and hate speech? Who should decide what free speech is? This forum account is currently banned. Ban Length: Permanent (N/A Remaining)
Ban Reason: Spamming | Contact us via http://breachqr3dqbysbq5khaadg5ynnpxn2wrmw5y3rnzesun55l6lkq73yd.onion/misc.php?action=help&hid=27 if you feel this is incorrect.
Posts: 893
Threads: 2
Joined: Aug 2023
If freedom of speech was real we could say anything, but they already limit this so it never existed in the first place
Posts: 1,056
Threads: 2
Joined: Jun 2023
There's no free speech if there's limits, of course something like threats shouldn't be considered as free speech, but you need to have the right to say what you want and feel safe. This forum account is currently banned. Ban Length: Permanent (N/A Remaining)
Ban Reason: Attempted Scamming | https://breachforums.rs/Forum-Ban-Appeals if you feel this is incorrect.
Posts: 524
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2023
Hard to say... I think it is a bit of both
Posts: 893
Threads: 2
Joined: Aug 2023
(Sep 09, 2023, 08:47 PM)Eagle Wrote: Hard to say... I think it is a bit of both
I hear you. It's tricky balancing free expression with avoiding harm. But I lean towards more limited restrictions, as long as speech doesn't directly incite violence. Censorship makes me uneasy.
Posts: 524
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2023
(Sep 09, 2023, 08:53 PM)mega-mind Wrote: (Sep 09, 2023, 08:47 PM)Eagle Wrote: Hard to say... I think it is a bit of both
I hear you. It's tricky balancing free expression with avoiding harm. But I lean towards more limited restrictions, as long as speech doesn't directly incite violence. Censorship makes me uneasy.
It gets dangerous when governments or companies become arbiters of acceptable speech. Slippery slope towards authoritarianism potentially...
Posts: 893
Threads: 2
Joined: Aug 2023
(Sep 09, 2023, 10:00 PM)Eagle Wrote: (Sep 09, 2023, 08:53 PM)mega-mind Wrote: (Sep 09, 2023, 08:47 PM)Eagle Wrote: Hard to say... I think it is a bit of both
I hear you. It's tricky balancing free expression with avoiding harm. But I lean towards more limited restrictions, as long as speech doesn't directly incite violence. Censorship makes me uneasy.
It gets dangerous when governments or companies become arbiters of acceptable speech. Slippery slope towards authoritarianism potentially...
Agreed. Those in power will inevitably try to censor dissent aimed at them, claiming it's "harmful." Free debate is essential.
Posts: 524
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2023
(Sep 10, 2023, 08:05 AM)mega-mind Wrote: (Sep 09, 2023, 10:00 PM)Eagle Wrote: (Sep 09, 2023, 08:53 PM)mega-mind Wrote: (Sep 09, 2023, 08:47 PM)Eagle Wrote: Hard to say... I think it is a bit of both
I hear you. It's tricky balancing free expression with avoiding harm. But I lean towards more limited restrictions, as long as speech doesn't directly incite violence. Censorship makes me uneasy.
It gets dangerous when governments or companies become arbiters of acceptable speech. Slippery slope towards authoritarianism potentially...
Agreed. Those in power will inevitably try to censor dissent aimed at them, claiming it's "harmful." Free debate is essential.
True, good point. Though I do worry about extremist misinformation spreading unchecked. Some balance is needed, i don't see who can be trusted to moderate impartially.
Posts: 893
Threads: 2
Joined: Aug 2023
(Sep 10, 2023, 04:07 PM)Eagle Wrote: (Sep 10, 2023, 08:05 AM)mega-mind Wrote: (Sep 09, 2023, 10:00 PM)Eagle Wrote: (Sep 09, 2023, 08:53 PM)mega-mind Wrote: (Sep 09, 2023, 08:47 PM)Eagle Wrote: Hard to say... I think it is a bit of both
I hear you. It's tricky balancing free expression with avoiding harm. But I lean towards more limited restrictions, as long as speech doesn't directly incite violence. Censorship makes me uneasy.
It gets dangerous when governments or companies become arbiters of acceptable speech. Slippery slope towards authoritarianism potentially...
Agreed. Those in power will inevitably try to censor dissent aimed at them, claiming it's "harmful." Free debate is essential.
True, good point. Though I do worry about extremist misinformation spreading unchecked. Some balance is needed, i don't see who can be trusted to moderate impartially.
It's a huge challenge even decentralized moderation risks ideological bias and overreach. Focusing restrictions narrowly on clear, direct threats is best we can do for now.
Posts: 524
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2023
(Sep 10, 2023, 05:49 PM)mega-mind Wrote: (Sep 10, 2023, 04:07 PM)Eagle Wrote: (Sep 10, 2023, 08:05 AM)mega-mind Wrote: (Sep 09, 2023, 10:00 PM)Eagle Wrote: (Sep 09, 2023, 08:53 PM)mega-mind Wrote: I hear you. It's tricky balancing free expression with avoiding harm. But I lean towards more limited restrictions, as long as speech doesn't directly incite violence. Censorship makes me uneasy.
It gets dangerous when governments or companies become arbiters of acceptable speech. Slippery slope towards authoritarianism potentially...
Agreed. Those in power will inevitably try to censor dissent aimed at them, claiming it's "harmful." Free debate is essential.
True, good point. Though I do worry about extremist misinformation spreading unchecked. Some balance is needed, i don't see who can be trusted to moderate impartially.
It's a huge challenge even decentralized moderation risks ideological bias and overreach. Focusing restrictions narrowly on clear, direct threats is best we can do for now. That makes sense. We should be able to argue hard about things without threatening, context matters too.
|
