So you want to outlaw reporting altogether just because someone is doing it wrong?

And yes, I do think that suppressing free will for the "common good" is bad.

Earlier I mentioned throwing fat gamer nerds in prisons if they can't do at least 15 pull ups. We can expand that if you like. Add those who can't solve Einstein's Puzzle. Add those who only speak one language. Add those who eat at McDonalds. Those who read Harry Potter. Those who watch Pawn Stars. Those who listen to pop music.

Clearly we know better, and clearly all these things are utter rubbish, therefore it is self evident that such people must either be brought into the fold or punished, and their activities outlawed. Right?

Again, I'm not telling you to preorder. Same as I'm not telling you to eat fast food. Nor would I do either of those things myself. But removing an option from others because of your self-righteous elitism is wrong.

And don't get me wrong, I am an elitist myself. I sometimes look down on people based on a number of the things I listed above. But never would I ever consider preventing those people from being who they are and doing what they want. Choices, good and bad, need to be present always. Without choices, that self-restraint you keep talking about is meaningless.

I largely agree with you, but when you have individuals who can afford to have private armies on retainer, Might Makes Right is the de facto law of the land, and freedom is merely a commodity, bought, sold, and traded, much like any other commodity.

It has always been a commodity. If anything, these days it's more available to the hoi polloi than ever before. The position of individuals with armies is less prominent than ever before. And if you want to train people to use their freedom responsibly and to see it as a valuable and earned tool (as opposed to a gift from a divine master — something to be abused) then you must allow them to make mistakes.

All children are told that the stove is hot. Some take it on faith and just never touch it. Some are still curious, look at it for a long time, maybe approach it to feel the heat, but don't actually touch. Some touch lightly and get burned. Some full on grab it.

Everyone except the second group are drooling imbeciles, but rendering a stove inaccessible will not grant them any additional IQ. Taking away their opportunity to learn by experience may prevent the burns, but will also block them from learning at all, because this is the only way of learning that is available to them.

When you have "education" systems that discourage critical thinking, people's ability to learn from their mistakes is greatly diminished, and the willingness to question authority is found only on the fringes, and what you end up with is a society that is enslaved by means of addiction of one sort or another. Comfortable numbness, if you will. So we're damned if we do, and damned if we don't. People, in large part, aren't learning from their mistakes or trying to hold power accountable, and the people who control the state couldn't be any happier.

So what to do?

this is a great thread about pre-orders. :P

I don't have all the answers.

One thing I can tell you, though, is that solving problems by creating restrictions as opposed to opportunities is not solving them at all, it's just blocking them from view.

As I previously stated several days ago, I don't think banning these sorts of things is the solution. I'm just calling a spade a spade, and it doesn't bode very well for the future. Something has to give fairly soon, and when it does, people are going to wish that they'd done something to prevent it. But that requires the ability to learn from one's mistakes, and the willingness to question authority....