In reply to Jeff Chandler.

Style, as opposed to content?

Wow Jeff. Consider what you are saying there.

I can write something really obnoxious and express views which are abhorrent to you, and completely contrary to what you believe, but as long as I couch it in a nice or clever way, you will just let it go?

I don't think so.

So let me ask you, where is the difference between what the Chinese government imposes on its citizens ~ and which free anonymous proxies and WordPress helps them avoid ~ and your form of censorship? [By "your form" I mean, any form, not you specifically]

But on a contrary note, I don't think it means we each have a valid but separate idea and enforce our own worldview on what "The democratization of publishing" means.

Perhaps its easier to say what it is not.

It clearly doesn't mean, "as long as I agree with what you write", or even "as long as I like the way you write it".

This is the nub of the issue, I think.

I would argue, the freedom to publish without censorship is worth the individual effort required to ignore questionable posts and poor-quality content. The freedom to publish, which WordPress extends to everyone ~ and is extended to you, of course ~ should be extended [by you] to all serious, legal discussion on whatever subject, with whatever outcome.

To me, at least, that is ~ in part ~ what "The democratization of publishing" means.