Not saying you did. The point I'm trying to make is that "free speech for the sake of free speech" misses the point. Limited speech is a function of politics. Unfettered speech is listed in the bill of rights as a right given by God, not the government.
In the context of the events spawning this discussion, there's this tendency highlighted where people are being punished for "wrongspeak"... words that someone else doesn't agree with. This isn't anything like "fire" in a theater. This is a matter of conversation. As far as I'm concerned, people can have whatever conversation they want. Their words do not hurt me or anyone else (unless they allow words to hurt them). The problem that you're dancing around but not really touching is when words turn to action.
Unless I'm misunderstanding the whole thing here...
But if I'm not, the real discussion should be "how do we control anti-social behavior?"
I don't disagree and your point is well taken. My thought is simply that when one uses a platform to incite violence, you go beyond the pale. I'm not calling for any site to be shutdown ... I can make my own decision what it is I want to see. I guess what I'm trying to convey is that I was fortunate enough to grow up in a time and place where America was a great melting pot of ideas. There were always extremes, right and left, but both were relegated to the sidelines. Today we allow the extremes to dictate to us all, and that's problematic. We've polarized society and I think somehow we need to get back to that middle ground where we can agree to disagree, rather than demonizing either side to the point of inciting violence.
It's actually a horrible example, particular when placed next to what you say next:
Your "perfect example" leads to a real, credible and immediate danger: death by trampling. Saying on an internet forum "I'm going to kill Mr. XYZ" isn't a credible threat, does not present an immediate threat, and is at worst a statement of fact or intent rather than inciting something.
I don't disagree that there are limits. But those limits have already been defined. There's already laws, etc in place. Punishing the owners of Gab and the other users who did nothing illegal, etc. is draconic crap that punishes innocent people.