This is not any legal or constitutional right, the consitution is about freedom of political speech.

For example, just because you can say "shit, piss, cum and shit" all you want, the FTC regulates that speech away from public broadcast airwaves.

Distribution is not "so-called", distribution of speech is literally NOT the same as speech itself.

You are clearly, clearly, clearly confusing the right of political speech as the right to have all speech distributed equally, which is truly just an irrational idea.



Well, the individuals involved inside of the consensus process itself get to define what "rational" means.

In the methodology of non-dual consensus, "rational" is defined first as simply being honest. For example, if someone is to acknowledge they made a mistake, or do not know an answer; this is evidence of "rational" thinking.

Secondly, "rational" is defined like it is defined in economics, which is the ability to communicate what is in your own best interests without making a contradiction.

Thirdly, "rational" is defined by the ability to perceive and communicate what is in your best interests as well as the interests of those you are building a consensus process.

Over-politicized thinking is not your friend, and, thus "irrational" to use in consensus building!



Rome Viharo

Web3 digital governance, distribution, and economics. Source designer for the DAO of BIG MOTHER, Aiki Wiki.