I have been coming across this post (and were linked by multiple people over a period of time) and I wanted to say a few things.

First of all, I believe that free speech is one of the most important aspects of our lives. Not just on the internet, but in real life as well. Nevertheless, one of the crucial aspects of free speech, in general, is that, just because free speech exists, does not mean there are no consequences for it. After all, I believe that it is important to mention that while opinions can exist, no one is obligated to agree, or disagree with them. However, this does not mean that free speech, no matter what it points to (agreeing or disagreeing with something) should be suppressed.

I think the biggest plus that Hive offers to its users is a platform where no one has to worry about their post being "deleted by admins" because the person wrote their opinion on a subject and it contradicts the opinion of a site's admins. Hive does not have that. Thanks to the nature of blockchain, what people say, will stay.

Since the first day, I announced my witness, I have always advocated for having more witnesses. More witnesses mean better decentralization, both on a technical level and a political level. Witnesses, just like everyone, have a say in the development and advancement of Hive as a platform.

As a witness and as a regular human being, I may not agree with everything that is written on Hive. But Hive's biggest strength, its immutability is something I will fight for. Is downvoting a post on Hive "censorship?" In my opinion, no. It is not. We always argue that anyone, at any given time, can stake Hive Power and it is up to them what they would like to do with it. If they want to upvote every post left and right, so be it. The other way around is the same. Do we need anything implemented on a technical level to counter this? In my opinion again, no.

I am not a native English speaker, so, when I hear the word "censorship" what comes to my mind is that restricting access, completely, to a certain item due to certain reasons by people in power. Hive, when we think about it, does not have that. Especially when we have more and more witnesses every week, adding their own decentralised nodes to the chain pushing the notion of immutability further.

On the other hand, if we wanted to talk about the "viewership" aspect, I agree. Certain communities as well as the trending page attracts quite a lot of people. This does not mean there's censorship or an "attack on free-speech" in my opinion. Anyone can create their own community to get around "community mutes" since they would be the community's manager. For trending and/or negative reputation related stuff... Those are all frontend. A developer can certainly build a frontend that completely ignores downvotes. This is, at the moment, technically possible. Utilizing Hive to its fullest. The data is available, the data will never be censored. It is up to frontends to utilize it however they see fit. It is possible that some people may agree with it, some people may not. But... does it really make a difference? They would definitely be opinions to be respected. If a person likes it, feel free to use it. If they don't, feel free to use an alternative frontend. The possibilities are endless on Hive.

"But rewards?" if anyone asks, has to remember that on Hive, rewards are never promised. Our biggest strength on Hive is the fact that I mentioned before. Whatever you say, will stay.

This text ended up longer than I would like to admit, still, there are a lot of things to say about this topic. However, as an advocate for decentralisation, I said it before, and I'll say it again. If anyone has the necessary experience or skillset to host a Hive node and have the means for it, please go ahead and become a witness and contribute to the technical and political decentralisation of our chain.