Thanks for the link. You would think this posts author would have included it, but then again, he seems to be against free speech in general. The whole post smells like an apology for Steemit's censorship.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I suspect that if you carefully read the post, with sight, rather than your sense of smell, it might just make real sense.
Basically, @aggroed said that if it was your website that displayed illegal posts, you would have the right to not display those posts. The inverse would be that if you had a website and someone posted something illegal on it, like CP, or criminal threats, you would be forced to display them, and then be liable criminally for doing so.
Which smells better to you?
I reckon @aggroed is all about free speech.