For sure. First off, I wouldn't support SOPA in the first place. But more importantly, outside of my personal use of the site (my comments, who I follow), my interest in Hubski is the platform. I wouldn't have started a site that used pseudonyms if I wasn't hoping that people will speak their mind. I fully expect that discussions that I find very disagreeable will occur.

Actually, the current state of media is a big reason for my interest in Hubski. Open discussion of news ideas and events is the basis of a civil society. Without it, power is abused and people suffer. The openness takes precedent over the content. If that is pushed to a place that makes us feel uncomfortable, then we are probably doing the right thing.

Speaking personally, I don't want to ban anything. I don't want to decide what is valuable, and what is not, what is offensive, and what is not. I am not interested in that. I value Hubski as a tool, and that's where I want to give it attention. At this point, I've used moderation twice. The first time was when /r/beatingwomen started cross posting here. I emailed the poster, and told him that I wasn't keen on hosting that type of content. He was friendly, I removed the bans, and all is good. The second ban was on some sort of hotel advertisement spammer. It was high frequency, and was messing up the all posts page.

TBH, eventually I'd like content discovery on Hubski to move away from the all posts page, but we aren't ready for that yet. If and when we do get to the point where there is no common feed, then I can be even more relaxed about content. If /r/beatingwomen wants an account and no one can see it unless they choose to, it's less of an issue. I don't want to judge content. I'm going to do my best to solve contentious content issues by allowing offended people to avoid it, not by policing it.

For a for-profit company, I think Twitter has done a fair job of letting it work as a platform, and keeping out of the content that is sent over it. If we get to the point that we need money, I want to do even better. A good media platform should get complaints about the content on it. That means you have content that regards issues that matter to people.

As an example related to this nyt piece, if someone posts "Why Hubski Sucks", that is ok with me, even if the reasons they give are not true. I can comment just like anyone else. People can make up their own minds. And, if they are right and Hubski does suck, that's my fault.