Replacements for Firefox and Thunderbird?

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 20:13:03 +0000, Chris Green wrote:
>On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 08:54:04PM +0100, Kaj Haulrich wrote:
>> On 14.01.2021 20.35, Liam Proven wrote:
>> <snip>  
>> > Removing hateful content is not censorship.  
>> </snip>
>> 
>> And who decides what's 'hateful'?
>>   
>So *anything* goes?
>
>It's difficult I agree, but there has to be some sort of line drawn.

If we follow link by link within the links Kaj Haulrich posted on Thu,
14 Jan 2021 05:54:48 +0100:
>https://tinyurl.com/yysew7g2
>https://tinyurl.com/y277rmw3
>https://tinyurl.com/yyzmo4vw
we easily can notice a very plausible line. If somebody writing for
Breitbart contributes to Wikipedia, this person could be banned, when
the content contributed to Wikipedia is untrue content taken over from
Breitbart, since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. This person will not
get banned for writing for Breitbart, the person will get banned for
adding untruth to Wikipedia articles. 
Wikipedia allows to speak badly about Donald Trump, if it's underpinned
with facts. "When I see a bird that walks like a duck and swims like a
duck and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck." Wikipedia is not
favouring Antifa or left wing contributors over alt-right contributors,
Wikipedia is just an encyclopedia aimed to provide facts, not to
provide bullshit.

An example
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veracity_of_statements_by_Donald_Trump#Voting_by_mail
underpinned with a tweet from Donald Trump. The source isn't Antifa,
the source is Donald Trump.

If an alt-right does contribute something against a civil rights
activist and does underpin it with e.g. a tweet of this civil rights
activist, then Wikipedia wouldn't censor this. If it's "underpinned"
with lies from Breitbart, it gets removed. I wouldn't call this
censorship, it's just selecting out lies.

To "hate" applies the same. "Free speech" can become "hate speech", if
the speech is based upon lies. This is the line when censorship could
become necessary. IOW the facts decide, not a person or interest group
decide.