The Economist on Free Speech - "Never try to silence views with which you disagree. Answer objectionable speech with more speech. Win the argument without resorting to force. And grow a tougher hide."

maybe because smug reddit intellectuals like you completely miss the point, spouting memes after memes.

The issues at hand are complex and subtle, if you start straw-manning and going into it without the right mentality it is impossible to actually have a discussion, and people on "your side" are too righteous to actually have one.

This is the issue, the issue about free speech, the things shared there where legal under US law. There where no nude girls, no see-trough clothes and nothing sexual ( at least sexual enough to quality as child porn). Chances are you never saw the place...it was full of facebook girls. You could go right now in your friends list and find plenty of sexy pictures of 15-18 year old girls, posted by them.

There where also no professional models. There are plenty of those that are way more provocative than anything posted on jailbait but still legal under US law.

Forget all I said, forget all the drama surrounding it, this is the TL;DR of the issue: Reddit, Google, Imgur etc are refusing to publish (not promote,simply publish) materials 100% legal under US law. They have the power to choose and hide this stuff. That is the argument, it is irrelevant if you personally disagree with it, you can make the point that the law should be changed. The point here however is that these corporations have to much power. Today its "child porn" , tomorrow it's "racism " and so on.

The point can be made that public opinion is being swayed this way and that by corporations. And we all know it's hard to keep them accountable. This is what the issue is all about, at least for those that took the time to look deeper.

/r/TrueReddit Thread Parent Link - economist.com