Invasion of privacy, breech of the peace, trespassing and probably more.
Your terrible analogy has almost nothing to do with freedom of speech, if you think a redditor writing an opinion on Musk is equivalent to them playing the drums in your bedroom at night, you might be a tad sensitive.
I understand your view of free speech, but they are also correct that it is a private space like a bedroom. They are in control of that space and made a rule saying not to bring articles from X into that space. The person ignored it and argued about it so they banned them from that space. If someone says don’t bring food into my establishment and I do, I have no right to be mad at them for telling me to leave. If I argue with them I have no right to superceded their banning me from their establishment. The issue isn’t free speech, the issue is respecting an establishments operation policies.
Thank you for understanding that I’m only here to talk about free speech.
If the rules were no X posts, then they should’ve had the post taken down with a warning. I don’t think a lifetime ban is a reasonable response to an undesirable opinion, I don’t think it meets the requirements of hate speech which is where I’d personally draw the line.
From what I understand from the article they did remove the post because it violated policy. It appears to me he got banned after arguing with the moderator that it wasn’t a Nazi salute. My views aside, it was the person arguing the policies of the establishment shouldn’t exist that got him banned from the establishment, not the post itself.
Edit: I may have this wrong though, I didn’t try to investigate anything, the fact that he was bitching about it on X was enough for me to determine he wasn’t worth my time. (Yet here I am talking about it … damnit)
Invasion of privacy, breech of the peace, trespassing and probably more.
Your terrible analogy has almost nothing to do with freedom of speech, if you think a redditor writing an opinion on Musk is equivalent to them playing the drums in your bedroom at night, you might be a tad sensitive.
I understand your view of free speech, but they are also correct that it is a private space like a bedroom. They are in control of that space and made a rule saying not to bring articles from X into that space. The person ignored it and argued about it so they banned them from that space. If someone says don’t bring food into my establishment and I do, I have no right to be mad at them for telling me to leave. If I argue with them I have no right to superceded their banning me from their establishment. The issue isn’t free speech, the issue is respecting an establishments operation policies.
Thank you for understanding that I’m only here to talk about free speech.
If the rules were no X posts, then they should’ve had the post taken down with a warning. I don’t think a lifetime ban is a reasonable response to an undesirable opinion, I don’t think it meets the requirements of hate speech which is where I’d personally draw the line.
From what I understand from the article they did remove the post because it violated policy. It appears to me he got banned after arguing with the moderator that it wasn’t a Nazi salute. My views aside, it was the person arguing the policies of the establishment shouldn’t exist that got him banned from the establishment, not the post itself.
Edit: I may have this wrong though, I didn’t try to investigate anything, the fact that he was bitching about it on X was enough for me to determine he wasn’t worth my time. (Yet here I am talking about it … damnit)
That’s exactly my point: all freedoms are limited in certain contexts.