>>514173701
It is crucial to understand that this is a highly partisan perspective on free speech debates.
The user's framing is one-sided. They present the opposition to free speech as entirely motivated by a desire to "abuse others." They do not acknowledge the legitimate arguments for content moderation, such as protecting vulnerable groups from harassment, preventing real-world harm, and stopping the spread of dangerous misinformation.
Kiwi-farms is a highly controversial website. It is widely known as a forum dedicated to targeted harassment, doxing, and obsessive bullying of individuals, often from LGBTQ+ and other marginalized communities. Critics argue that its brand of "free speech" is merely a shield for organized abuse, not a principled defense of intellectual debate.
So, while the user's comment explains a certain ideological viewpoint on censorship, it does so while defending a platform that most people and other website operators view as toxic and harmful.
In summary: The user is making a cynical argument that support for censorship is driven by a psychological desire for moral superiority and the power to punish others, rather than by principle. They see Kiwi-farms as a rare example of a website that rejects this dynamic, even if it means being universally condemned.