[dmamills]

> That I can't meaningfully defend someone's ability to discuss their ideas with other willing participants if I don't actually agree with the content of their message?

Not exactly. The implication is that it is all you can do. You have to wrap up all this hateful content and cover it in a blanket of "free speech" so that it is palatable for you to defend. There is no defending the actual content, just the abstract idea that should be allowed to be said.

Forgive me for not making my context clear in the original comment. I believe every human has value, I believe producing hateful content diminishes that value, and is not a productive activity.

I'm not sure what to say about the last bit of your comment. My opinion certainly doesn't matter. The legal rights of the companies' that are being asked to host this content is what matters. In section 2.6.7 and 2.7 of Zayo's Acceptable Use policy, they use open ended language so they can express their right to control what customers they do business with.

https://www.zayo.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/zayo-accepta...

[bobsmooth]

If what KF is doing is so terrible it would be illegal, but it isn't.

[hatefulmoron]

> The legal rights of the companies' that are being asked to host this content is what matters.

I don't believe you. This is the first time you've brought this up, I'm inclined to believe this is just the strongest rationalization you can come up with. In reality, you don't want these people to discuss their ideas and you're shopping for any justification.