[user104658]

I do understand what you're saying Maru, I really do, but it's where I have to come back to the gist of one of my very first posts; that there are TWO options... the first, and honestly, my preferred option being allow people to say what they want but allow others the right to respond with their opinions. Their true opinions - about that person - for saying the things they are saying. In my opinion, this is essential to maintaining the sort of equilibrium you're talking about; people naturally moderate their own words when they know they can be personally called out on them. If they feel like they can go all out without fear of anyone being able to say anything to them, directly, in return... then that is exactly what they will do.

IF that's not possible, then there needs to be some sort of restriction on how far people are allowed to go with what they are saying.

The current situation on TiBB is not the former or the latter, and obviously this is taken to extremes and I'm not comparing anyone here to the KKK, but;

To use your examples...

It's like the KKK having the right to say whatever they want and share whatever views they want, then someone saying "Mr KKK, these views are racist. You are a racist."... and that person then being arrested for calling the KKK member a racist.

It comes down to this: "full free speech if you're speaking in general, or about a non-forum person, but absolutely ZERO free speech when it comes to talking about forum members." You flat out can't. At all. It's a lopsided system that, I will say again, is going to spiral further out of control in terms of the sorts of opinions that are being posted.

I suppose to go back to real-world allegories you could suggest that this is much like freedom of speech vs. defamation... but then, it's not defamation if the comments about an individual are opinions based on facts and in the "public interest". The ability to point out racism and other prejudice in specific members is arguably both.