Arguing online about the merits of free speech is as paradoxical as having discussions about free will.
As for free speech online, do you think there should be no limit to what can be said or shared online? What about pedophilia or cannibalism? Or, more relevantly, what about election-denialism, insurrectionism or dangerous health disinformation that are bound to make people act dangerously for themselves and society as a whole? Point is, free speech is never absolute, and where the line is drawned is an important conversation that must be had. There is no easy, objective solution to it.
I also cringed at your list.
"what about election-denialism"
I dont think I can help you.
What do you disagree with? I'll note you still haven't advanced anything.