I agree with you to an extent. 

But as long as some accounts have more value than others, and that translates to more power than others in votes or downvotes - then the ability for your voice to be heard can be limited by enough people with enough power. 

That means that freedom of speech on Hive is not a true definition of freedom of speech. Should it be so? Well, 'law' is effectively the actions of the community, what happens when you have conflicting power groups on the same 'freedom of speech' platform?

You get a shit fight, that's what you get.

Here's a post I wrote on the subject of defining free-speech on Hive under tha acknowledgement it is not the true definition of free-speech: https://peakd.com/hive-181465/@montycashmusic/regarding-the-long-term-preservation-of-a-community-definition-of-free-speech-on-the-hive-platform

By the way, it is suspected the user of the adm account is 'logic' - this was on the jasonliberty post's comments I shared with you:

![Screenshot from 20210215 125211.png](https://files.peakd.com/file/peakd-hive/montycashmusic/xsQYE8Ll-Screenshot20from202021-02-152012-52-11.png)

'logic' is a part of the hivewatcher crew?

Of course, nothing can be conclusively proven. This quote was at the top of quackwatch posts.