I have tried to make this exact same argument with ppl but I think the biggest issue that advocates of "speech moderation" fail to grasp is that any form of regulation or moderation inherently requires someone to decide what is permissible and what is not. Even if the designated gatekeepers are democratically elected, it doesn't guarantee they’ll make the right choices—or that a universally "right" decision even exists. The subjective nature of filtering speech introduces a constant risk of overreach and bias, regardless of the intent.