I was talking about how things at some point thought to be impossible are possible now thanks to the development of humanity. My point is that humanity has progressed and continues to do so, therefore it's not impossible for us to reach a better state of affairs

This is not very relevant. You're saying that anything is possible so the word never has no meaning in any context.

In this context, I think it does.

Most people agree that murder is bad. Some people still do it.

If someone said that there will never be a time when no one murders anyone else, you might say that it's always possible that in the future, it may be possible. You may be technically correct in a trivial way, but it's colloquially irrelevant.

It doesn't really affect the current discussion because if you can't foresee how it would happen, you can't really change the concept enough to have it make a difference.

I should clarify that freedom of speech is different in different countries.

I can only speak for the US version. Perhaps the OP is speaking for a different country's version.

In the US version, the minority viewpoint is held at the same level as the majority viewpoint. Therefore, consensus screening does not allow for freedom of speech.

Best it come from a consensus, meaning people agree to not say something on their own accord: that way, rules are clear and no one is offended by being excluded from making such a choice, therefore less likely to break the rules.

This part is really unclear. The majority can agree not to say something of their own accord. That doesn't stop anyone else from saying it.

It also allows the majority of people to make rules clear that people in a minority don't like. The example in the article is the LGBT group was in a minority before that was silenced.

You seem to be assuming that the majority makes the consensus rules in ways that you would always agree with. That might not always be the case.

It is wrong to try to set control over what's allowed to say because it restricts one's personal autonomy. It is, however, not wrong for people to agree to restrict themselves of something for a good reason.

People can make a consensus that they themselves choose not to say. They cannot make a consensus about what other people are not allowed to say.

The quote you took and disagreed with says the same thing you just wrote.