@srn I'll concede that. The popularity of an idea is much less of a bulwark against its suppression in less democratic societies.

@Trev well, even in e.g. the US it's still an imperfect one, especially against the sort of non-governmental suppression that the EFF has recently been complaining about (if i'm correctly understanding that the mention of the EFF was alluding to their recent remarks about cloudflare/google/godaddy and neo-nazis).

@srn (full disclosure: I've donated to the EFF)

I have a very mixed opinion of what's in https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/08/10-years-activists-silenced-internet-intermediaries-long-history-censorship but I think ultimately that it's important to hold organizations (the government and corporations) accountable for what content is being unpublished or expunged especially when it's happening unjustly or as the result of broad-strokes prosecution.

@tomas

I'm less concerned with the rights of people to commit incitement (which I agree should be none) and more with the legal precedents established in prosecuting those people.

Bad precedent can actually hurt the rights of people to speak and assemble. Unfortunately in common law based systems, challenging those precedents usually requires representing someone in court to appeal the ruling.