[some1else]

Views are free to be had, and command no respect whatsoever. I respect criticism of any human rights violation, the rest of the list doesn't pertain to me. I support the freedom of people to have those views, but also welcome the prudent choice of restricting the ability to utilize the most powerful medium of our time to spread hatred. Hate all you like, but you don't get the platform on the count of first amendment.

Disclosure: I spent a bunch of time in 2016 and 2017 reporting European hate groups and pages for violations of TOS. Video montages that recycled unrelated footage for misinformation about the immigrant crisis (for fear-mongering purposes) weren't enough to achieve a takedown, but gradually most of them progressed far enough in their rhetoric, to objectively deserve removal (Look up European identity movements).

Downvoters: I'm also talking about private Fb groups where assaults on asylums were organized.

[manfredo]

Sure, not all views command respect, but would you actually fire an employee if a co-worker showed you records of a campaign distribution to Trump? Or if they showed you a post criticizing a Saudi cleric's views of women's rights or LGBT rights?

This memo isn't about what Facebook allows on it's platforms it's about policing the views of it's employees.

[some1else]

The way I read the article is that HR told the complainers that everyone is entitled to their opinion.

On the other hand, how many Marxsists are hired into Wall Street companies, and what is their sway on the company culture?