[conservatism_IS_compassion]

It's possible to consider the door of a mens' room stall a "publication"--but aside from such as that, publications which attract an audience are edited for the taste of that audience. The owners of the publications see to that, and have a right to do so.

A libertarian has no objection to property rights, and so has no logical objection to any particular publication's ownership editing the publication--even if that publication's ownership is libertarian.

FR is a moderated forum; its ownership has a right to moderate it. Its moderation is what defines its character, and its character defines, late or soon, its audience. IMHO any unmoderated forum is an open invitation to a de facto denial of service attack, in which the perspective of the forum is drowned out by noise expressing other perspectives without limit.

I see no constructive point to any such forum, over any length of time.

[dirtboy]

Well stated.

[OWK]

IMHO any unmoderated forum is an open invitation to a de facto denial of service attack, in which the perspective of the forum is drowned out by noise expressing other perspectives without limit.

Perhaps....

Or perhaps there are other ways of dealing with the potential of these sources of noise that don't require censorship and overt control...

Many are under consideration.

That's what makes the net fun.

[Frunabulax]

IMHO any unmoderated forum is an open invitation to a de facto denial of service attack, in which the perspective of the forum is drowned out by noise expressing other perspectives without limit.

I see no constructive point to any such forum, over any length of time.

Actually, if you look at their posting rules it seems they do have a moderated forum in spite of their free speech claims.