In this posting, Dave Winer defends the group that issued death threats against Kathy Sierra. Dave says...
"It's what being American is about, tolerating all kinds of speech, especially stuff we don't agree with and don't like."
This is the old First Amendment thing, you know, where Americans completely fail to understand their own constitution and insist they have the right to free speech.
Firstly, you don't, plain and simple. The First Amendment only guarantees that Congress wont pass laws to limit your freedom of speech; it doesn't guarantee the right of reply in the press etc.
Secondly, you don't, plain and simple. Not withstanding the above, no one any where has complete freedom of speech. Don't believe me? Okay try these examples. One, try being a war correspondent and try to broadcast the the time and location of an attack you know about. Two, try being a top civil servant and writing publicly about documents that have been sealed for a certain number of years by the government. Three, try being a white supremist and publish a document that calls for white people to rise up and attack blacks. Will you be able to do any of these things? No. Why? Because freedom of speech is not absolute there are limits. Those limits apply in this case too.
If I dislike Kathy and write saying so in fairly graphic terms, that is okay. If I publish a picture of her with a noose around her neck (as those Dave defends did) then that is not simply passing an opinion, that is incitement, and your freedom of speech is, rightly, curtailed in those circumstances.
So, examining the facts here, there is only one of two conclusions to come to. One, Dave Winer cannot tell the difference between passing an opinion and incitement to violence; or two, Dave knows the difference full well and is playing devil's advocate in order to drive links to his site. I know which one I find more likely. Shame on you Dave Winer!