I'd intended to concern myself entirely with why the responses in the parent comment were bad counter-arguments against the arguments/sentiments it quoted: the question of whether or not Yarvin's disinvitation might have a chilling effect on other types of speech did not even enter my head.
I'm sorry if what I wrote was unclear. I'll took another look at the first section and try to see how it ended up resembling the slippery slope fallacy you describe.
I'm sorry if what I wrote was unclear. I'll took another look at the first section and try to see how it ended up resembling the slippery slope fallacy you describe.