It's not weird at all, it's pointing out most free speech absolutists just mean speech for themselves and their friends. Musk will be silent about this.
What most people seem to miss is that companies like Facebook aren't the government and therefore aren't held to the standard of free speech. Signal ng up for an account and agreeing to their terms gives them authority to censor.
It's similar to how neoliberals say they care about humans when in reality they only care about corporations. Messaging doesn't always match optics.
You can claim no true Scotsman, but you need to back it up with reasonable alternatives to alternative definitions of the same term.
Political movements don't care what a single individual thinks.
Once again the optics doesn't match the messaging.
Germany may not have free speech, and if the German people don't want it that's totally fine.
except for everywhere in the real world, where you have "free speech, kinda"
Watching the pro-deplatformers get burned by their own illiberalism is very satisfying; watching some of them not having learned any lesson from it, doubly so.
Definitely not on the scale you're implying. People disagreed on who should be deplatformed. People generally didn't call you a "free speech absolutist" if you didn't self identify as such. That was a term people dubbed themselves (and often failed to live up to).
You're making it sound like there's a large group of people that were concerned about deplatforming in general and they were randomly and derogatorily labeled free speech absolutists against their will, to shut the conversation down. Maybe that happened in a few very specific places on the internet, but that's not what the broader conversation was.
It just seems like these comments want to stir the pot