[chc]

Their stated rationale is that Gab serves disproportionately as a place to organize activities that reduce people's freedom, such as harassment campaigns against minority groups and anti-democratic activity like voter intimidation, and so they felt that hosting it was less in the spirit of freedom than banning it.

Ultimately, it's a problem that all pro-freedom platforms have to deal with: How much freedom should you give people to take away other people's freedom? When one group of people wants another to be less free, any action you take will result in a loss of freedom for someone.

[hellcow]

> How much freedom should you give people to take away other people's freedom?

This is the very purpose of law according to John Locke who heavily influenced America's founders. To John Locke, the way to maximize freedom for everyone was by establishing laws which restrict people's ability to remove others' freedoms.

Having platforms like F-Droid self-govern and establish rules to try and maximize freedoms in the world is a pretty interesting experiment and a great showcase of small government, and thus should be widely supported by conservatives :)

[scarby2]

> Having platforms like F-Droid self-govern and establish rules to try and maximize freedoms in the world is a pretty interesting experiment and a great showcase of small government, and thus should be widely supported by conservatives :)

Most modern day "conservatives" are not in fact conservatives. They dont seek a return to or a preservation of any traditional value at this point and instead seek radical change into a new and uncertain future. They have largely abandoned conservatism and replaced it with something entirely more terrifying.