Would they be wrong? Edit: AFAICT both sides are "technically not wrong", homomorphic to the basic "free speech" argument, "it's technically not illegal". I'm

Would they be wrong? Edit: AFAICT both sides are "technically not wrong", homomorphic to the basic "free speech" argument, "it's technically not illegal". I'm a bit flabberghasted that no one has constructed an ironclad technological solution to this wishy-washy dance of weak arguments, backed up by rhyme but not reason. Proof verifiers should come to politics.