Yes, I don't. I take a more philosophocal stance to the issue of society than "freedom above everything". That's not to say I'm against freedom, but I understand that they are nuances to that.

For one, everybody acting the way he pleases, even in areas that seem innocuous or totally a personal choice, can have potentially harmful impact to society at large.

Who's to say what's harmless? This requires a notion of harm, and harm to one's customs/preferred way of life/kind of society he wants, is also a kind of harm.

Even something as basic as the right to eat whatever you want (e.g consequences for obesity rates, social welfare costs, etc). So it depends on what the priorities are. Not everybody, and not every culture, puts the individual ahead of society. Nor it is self-evidently right to do so.

>That you're allowed to post this comment is a social norm. Not allowing you would also be a social norm. Is there no real argument for why you should be allowed to comment?

Well, not really. If the goal of the forum was "total openess and free expression for all", there would be an argument against disallowing certain people/comments.

But if a team, X, built a forum for a specific purpose, why should they allow anyone not aligned with that purpose to post in it? People make choices, not only about how they personally live, but also about how other people shall behave if they want to use/live in etc what they've built, from a country to a web forum.