I argued mostly because of what you said in your posting

This is also yet another reason we need venues like HIVE where subversive information is difficult for these control freaks to squelch.

I doubt that it is difficult for those you have in mind to suppress subversive information in their eyes. Rather, I would say that a platform like Hive is either too unimportant or too small to expend energy on at the time. Those who aim to keep this or similar environments small or make it impossible to operate need only change the laws, as we have recently read here, and in one fell swoop they have undermined the attractiveness of posting here or the possibility of trading crypto. Natural rights don't help you there, because you don't get into the position to apply them in the first place. Because you lack the counterpart to whom you can address your disagreement. You would have to be able to prevent laws from being passed that impede the scope of free trade and interaction, for example.
If you can't do that, the question is what else can you do? While I share your annoyance that it seems that the dissemination of material that can lead to criminal acts is already considered a criminal act itself, it just makes it clear that political representatives seem to do whatever they want.

If the dealmakers networked with Hive do not want to make themselves liable to prosecution and seek to act within the framework of the law, not even your own disobedience will help you, because it would have to be the disobedience of those who pull the strings on Hive on which you depend.

As the two convicts from the case you described said, "laws only work if we follow them", the mass of lawbreakers must increase and people in large numbers must take the risk of disobeying and then being caught doing so in order to bring about a possible turnaround in the legal sense. For example, through clever lawyers. Since this is a high risk, it can be assumed that not many will follow this path.

So you can blog yourself and complain about this or that encroachment on your freedom, but I would then ask, what does that change? It may upset you that I say this because it implies that I might think that whether you publish this content of your posting or not makes no difference - it actually may even spread pessimism (so, valuable information would be for me, for instance, the opposite, where you can name a source where people legally won their cases). What you are achieving is agreement about these deplorable conditions and maybe that is what you are after.

but the pursuit of knowledge and virtue is worthwhile even if it means being accused of crime by the political class whose career is organized crime.

How do you know if it's worth it, since I assume that you yourself have not been officially accused? In what way is it worth it for you personally?