• There are some facts that are demonstrably true

• Facts are different then values and priorities

People should accept demonstrably-true facts but not values and priorities automatically. There should be no censorship of people’s views and priorities, but people should be honest and base their views and priorities on fact not fiction.

• People sometimes use falsifications to avoid being seen as callous or absurd
• But also people also use claims of fake news and falsification to downplay valid values and priorities

Sometimes even the most non-partisan fact-checkers can be guilty of calling out legitimate facts based on their own biases. Sometimes something can be true, if in a limited sense. That limited sense should be clearly disclosed, and people’s values and priorities made clear in an honest fashion.

• Fact-checkers should try understand the values and priorities of those they are trying fact check
• Fact-checkers should point out misleading statements
• Fact-checkers should try to explain why the person believes in or is making a misleading statement
• Fact-checkers shouldn’t be in business of deciding if a policy is callous or absurd

I don’t support censorship, but I do think the public deserves an honest debate from all sides and that perspectives outside of the mainstream should not be suppressed or not allowed to be heard. Just because you disagree with something, or don’t believe it should be taken seriously, it doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be heard.