Its not about how smart he should have been but if it is ever acceptable to oust someone for infringing on a societies moral compass instead of only for harming or trying to harm anyone. Because historically our shared compass has been shit and the source of quite a bit evil. Racism, sexism and slavery where at some point in time socially accepted and breaching that shared moral compass had dire consequences. Think honorkillings for sex before marriage, pinning white feathers on men to pressure them to die in the trenches of ww1, slutshaming, beeing shunned from society for being gay, having to fulfill your marital duties or face being raped and beaten, mobs forming for people using the wrong colored bathroom or having prostitutes persecuted and treated like second class citizens. Thinking back to since when your version of our shared moral compass no longer involved such deeply reprehensible parts the answer is often rather problematic. Its likely since you reached your 20 or so, since its the version of your societies compass you came up with. Now what are the chances that i just seemed to be arriving once mob justice became a good idea because we finally got the moral compass right?

I for myself think i will run less of a risk of being a staunch supporter of ethnic cleansings without knowing it if I instead stick to the rule that as long as you arent hurting anyone else, you are good to go. And no, hurt feelings from arguments dont count, or we rob our self of ever evolving our compass further. Without free speech and open discussions we are cementing the status quo. So if he wants, Stallman can be as socially incompetent and offensive as he wants. He has to live with being seen as a weirdo, but i dont think he has a problem with that.

But then again, I know that I dont know much on the topic.