[louthy]

So, to be clear, the GP was stating that their issue is a lack of free speech. You agree that that’s your biggest issue with Bluesky too.

But you’re unhappy with people expressing their personal opinions, primarily because you don’t agree with them?

What version of free-speech is it that you want? I assume it’s just like all ‘free speech absolutioniats’: free speech as long as it’s your own or from people you agree with.

[GlacierFox]

Who said any of this nonsense you're coming out with?

Where did I say I was unhappy with people expressing their opinions? What sort of surreal strawman are you attempting to build here?

My issue was, quite simply, with the predominantly ultra-left phycho's that have taken a foothold there dominating the discourse. Theres no conversations there, as expected, there's just abuse. It's like twitter but in reverse. Probably why the out-of-touch celebrity mass has transfered there, with the assumption that's what real people in real life are actually like...

[louthy]

“ That's my biggest issue with it.”

Those are your words. They literally agree with the OP’s position on free speech. You then go on to state that you don’t like what people say, even though you are lamenting the lack of free speech. You’re a contradiction with a hyper aggressive view of others: calling others “psychos” says more about you and your small minded attitude to others than it does about the people on Bluesky.

So you don’t like what people say. Who cares? Either put up with it because you believe in free speech or stop lamenting the lack of free speech on Bluesky.

And then maybe consider how you view others. Having an opinion of people being psychos just because they don’t align with your worldview is the mindset of the extremist