I like and respect many of these people. But i continue to struggle with the concept. The distinction between “silencing” and more/responsive/critical speech eludes me. I see instead the problem of the preferred first speaker. https://harpers.org/a-letter-on-justice-and-open-debate/

“The problem of the preferred first speaker” is the tendency to impose norms of civility, openness, productiveness, and dialogue-encouraging on a RESPONSE to expression that we do not impose on the expression itself.

On the other hand, some of the reactions to this seem absolutely devoted to making its point. Ugh.

No seriously, now I wonder if the letter was crafted to make its point not in its text but through the anticipated reactions. Good Lord above people.

I mean if that was their intent -- to illustrate their proposition through anticipated reactions -- I have to compliment them on their craft, even if I don't agree with them entirely. https://twitter.com/JennyBoylan/status/1280646004136697863?s=20

Also, "public shaming and ostracism" are free speech and association, and I guarantee you that you support them -- you just disagree with me about when they should be used.

Be suspicious of free speech philosophies that require you to refrain from speaking to promote speech.