[emseetech]

Community notes is better than nothing, but they only relate to a single tweet. So if one tweet with misinformation gets 100k likes, then a community note might show up correcting it.

But if 100 tweets each get 1000 likes, they're never singularly important enough to community note.

[cptnapalm]

Fair enough on that. The problem I've seen (and don't have a good idea for how to fix) is on Reddit where the most terminally online are the worst offenders and they simply drown out everything else until non-crazy people just leave. It doesn't help that the subreddit mods are disproportionately also the terminally online.

[n4r9]

Does the "freedom" in free speech mean freedom from censorship, or freedom from being drowned out? People often assume the former, but the latter is worth consideration.

[cptnapalm]

That's interesting. Off the cuff, I'll say it would depend on venue. Like on Reddit, you can easily have dozens of people saying exactly the same thing and other views can easily disappear in the muck. That's not even getting into the dominant view down voting all dissent. Still, everyone there can type out their thoughts in as complete a fashion as they so choose.

In person, things are different. The dominant side can and often enough does drown out dissent. In that case, the intent is to silence. So that would be "censorship" in a cultural, not legal sense which would be hostile to the freedom of speech in the cultural sense, not legal.