Originally Posted by Dark_Ansem
This is only partially true: some speech is criminal and does not only not deserve support, nor freedom.

Of course.

I should also add that conduct not rising to the level of a ban does not mean that it is acceptable or should be encouraged. Everyone should attempt to be polite and reasonable. Sometimes that is not going to happen. Generally when that fails it is temporary, and those involved can work it out among themselves. Sometimes warnings are given (vometia being a little quicker on that than I tend to be), and in very rare cases, bans.




Originally Posted by Squesing
Maybe you ignore that "free speech" is not total.

No, generally that is assumed to be the case when talking about free speech. Very few people think fraud, etc, should be classified as speech.


Originally Posted by Squesing
Have you ever heard about Popper's paradox of the tolerance, anyway?

Yes, I have, and I've seen the full passage, which is rather different than some people try to promote (that it is necessary to be intolerant) from the short version.

“I do not imply for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force...”

Thus far, force has not been required for suppression.


Originally Posted by Squesing
And I am talking about the job to be human, before being a moderator. You fail in both, anyway.

You do realise, if I adopted your advice for moderating the forum, you would be banned, right?