- VD December 10, 2020 7:40 AM
objectively, what do you think of Gab's 'commitment to free speech'?
Genuine, but misguided and ultimately untenable. Free speech is an evil Promethean concept used as a Trojan horse to attack Christianity and the nations.
Wrong, free speech as a government right is that.
Gab has a diversity of groups which regulate speech internally. It does not hold a free speech ideology, it holds a laissez faire ideology, which is adaptive to the Internet, being efficiently lazy.
For a counter-example, see Saidit which limits group moderator censorship
The First Amendment was meant to protect the state churches of the several states, and thus it works to promote a diversity of groups on Gab, groups being similar to states.
Gab's "freedom of speech" mimics the de-facto freedom of speech of the globe. By jurisdictional arbitrage a man may say anything he likes, although no one is obliged to listen.
Gab's free speech stance merely acknowledges this reality. It is pointless to suppress opinions which will simply appear elsewhere on the Web. Thus as long as no legal hassle results, all opinions are permitted. Speakers are permitted to experience the social consequences of their speech.
Of course, Torba doesn't actually understand what he's doing right, and thinks the #1A should guarantee every US citizen's "free speech". It's a good example of how contrarian intelligence can simply result in more complicated errors, and shows that popular practical opinions often benefit from the wisdom of crowds.