Judge them by their stance on freedom of speech.
In terms of how they wrote things down, it’s literally the 1st fucking rule.
nostr:nprofile1qqs8d3c64cayj8canmky0jap0c3fekjpzwsthdhx4cthd4my8c5u47spzemhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumt0wd68ytnsw43z7qg5waehxw309aex2mrp0yhxgctdw4eju6t0qy3hwumn8ghj7urjdau8jtt90pcx2unfd4jkuapwdah8yetwv3jhytnrdaks0duay6 nostr:nevent1qqsw5jzrshxugj8wjhk8zqw6p4c9dyc52m5sj7vjasyym62j2006ceqpz9mhxue69uhkummnw3ezuamfdejj7q3qcjw49ftnxene9wdxujz3tp7zspp0kf862cjud4nm3j2usag6eg2sxpqqqqqqzpvap5d
What people say about it and how they live it are most often in conflict. Which stance should I judge them by? And, come to think of it, why is this a high priority standard of judgment, anyway? Been rethinking a lot if 'first principals' of late. Some of them aren't withstanding scrutiny very well.