[bastardoperator]

So how does this work? Some one is crappy for thinking violence, racism, misinformation, and harassment should never be tolerated? What's extreme about that? Please do enlighten me...

There is nothing extreme about getting booted from facebook because one can't behave like a reasonable adult. As noted above if anyone did any of this in a setting like a restaurant they would be asked to leave, coupled with assistance from law enforcement and even possible arrest for trespassing and disturbing the peace.

So who's wrong here? The businesses that don't want to be subjected to certain types of speech from customers because it impacts their business or the people that feel they have the right to say whatever they want free from consequence? Why can a McDonald's ask a customer to leave their establishment because they used the N word in front of customers, but Facebook can't? And let's be clear, in both cases no censorship occured, there was just consequences after the fact. Looking forward to your reply.

[bena]

Only point I would make is to say that censorship has occurred.

But that's not necessarily a bad thing. There are times and places to censor and be censored. Not all things should be said at all times.

I think the problem is that we see censorship as something bad, so anyone quelling speech inappropriate for the setting can't be censoring because they're doing something good, not bad. But censorship isn't bad in and of itself. It's the reason for the censorship that makes it good or bad.

Censoring people because they are criticising you? That's bad. Censoring people because they are talking about hockey on a basketball forum? That's good.

So I would say, don't fall into the trap of getting into an argument about defining censorship. Keep the argument focused along the lines of kicking assholes out of McDonalds. Have them explain how its different from that.

[_3u10]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruneyard_Shopping_Center_v._R...

In American constitutional law, this case established two important rules:

under the California Constitution, individuals may peacefully exercise their right to free speech in parts of private shopping centers regularly held open to the public, subject to reasonable regulations adopted by the shopping centers

under the U.S. Constitution, states can provide their citizens with broader rights in their constitutions than under the federal Constitution, so long as those rights do not infringe on any federal constitutional rights

So far the court has rejected the application of Pruneyard to the online space, but it might change with more sympathetic plantiffs