The implication being that there exists some notion of "we" which has internally consistent and coherent positions?
It's really easy to feel superior to others when you construct an imaginary person (typically named after 'communities' and given names such as "HN", or "Reddit") in your head that is the nuanceless contradictory amalgamation of all of the various opinions that you have heard.
> At the end of the hearing, Cousins said he would be issuing a ruling in EFF's favor. However, he largely won't address the First Amendment and privacy issues brought up by EFF's motion. To Cousins, a simple issue of timing was paramount.
Loaded question. Quantity have a quality of its own.
A small amount of donated money could land an employee in hot water with the employers/family/social circles (which we as a society don't want). A huge amount of money could outright buy an election - which is unhealthy.
The first enhances the marketplace of ideas. The second could drown any other ideas.
So money should be protected as a speech to prevent repression. Not sure if it is possible legally (even if we ignore the first amendment)
