I can refer you to your own past discussions on this topic. After all, you frequently post these same three links whenever freedom of speech comes up on HN:
Generally speaking, you typically post some variation of "free speech is oppression"/"outlaw harmful speech", to which other posters generally reply with sources debunking the core premise of your argument, ultimately followed by you either ignoring them and doubling down and/or breaking site guidelines by throwing ad hominems. This is a very low quality of discourse for HN.
I am? Can you give specific examples from the sources I provided where that applies?