Why should audiophile deniers be allowed on an audiophile forum?

You are wrong!

Take a look at bill c67 in Canada...It is because of this that Jordan Peterson became known everywhere...he protest against it...

but it’s just another opinion, isn’t it? Everyone’s free to say what they think, aren’t they? Nothing is being forced on you, aside from having to listen.

You are too old my friend!

Reality is tweeter and facebook... people live thereoa great amount of time each day and they take their news there... Why do you think it is so important to limit the power of these corporations?

By the way there is no real competitions now more of a gang complicity...Awake... Three corporations controls almost  all products...

All that "canceling" of Rowling is of minor importance and blown all out of proportion to the general population, unless you live on Twitter or some other social medium and think that's reality. 

I got that impression because that is effectively what you wrote. While things are screwed up here, wrt free speech and free thought, no, it has not been screwed up here till somewhat recently. Now we have both sides trying to screw each other. How is that working out?

JK Rowling was not blown out of proportion, nor is the issue with female athletes competing with trans people. This is mainstream news including JK. Do you have any female friends?

There are not some people unaware. There are whole countries of people, 100's of millions of people if not billion+ totally unaware, and should be aware. That is where censorship leads. It is and had always been about control.

Mahgister is an adult and you seem as worked up as him.

@deludedaudiophile  You're arguing for more government regulation and I would need to see what form they would take before I could offer an opinion.

However, what I don't think is acceptable, is that you and an outraged mob, lobby Hobby Lobby's bank, which I consider an essential service, effectively infrastructure, such that the bank feels pressured to drop them as a client

I'm not sure how this could be enforced.  Banks are in the business of making money. They're not going to drop a client or refuse service unless the alternative causes them to lose more money than dropping the client. If the government says no you can't drop Hobby Lobby  but the banks alternative is going to cost them more. I don't understand how this type of structure would work unless the government basically runs the bank. 

100 people have 100% of the capital in a bank.

The bank does business with a company 80 of these people feel goes against their personal beliefs so they threaten to withdraw their money.

Does the bank drop the company or let the 80 people leave and how would the government enforce this? 

How is the alternative going to cost them more?  It will right now, but if companies in critical infrastructure cannot drop clients then there would be no downside as you can't drop them, so you can't be blamed for having them as a client.

The problem is monopolistic corporate power and neo liberalism... Not the question if there is too much or not enough regulations... Money and power dont keep roots in a country...

This is a world wide crisis not only an American empire decline problem ..

Most people look at a tree and are unable to fathom what the forest is it seems...

I dont speak for you djones but for all of us...

You’re arguing for more government regulation and I would need to see what form they would take before I could offer an opinion.