Comment by nobody9999

> This catchy phrase is catch 22. Negative consequences of freedom mean there is no freedom.

That's something of a misnomer. In the case where the government (as in China) will visit consequences upon you for your speech limits freedom.

But others using their speech to express their displeasure with your speech does not.

Do you see how that works? If your peers disagree with you and express that, it's not limiting freedom, it's giving the same freedom to everyone.

I do believe that it's inappropriate (note the word I use here, as it has a specific meaning and implication) to target someone's professional status for a real or perceived disagreement (assuming that those disagreements are not relevant to the target's professional duties).

That doesn't make it illegal, just petty, vindictive and in bad faith. None of which limits anyone's freedom to express themselves.

There's a big difference between legality and social norms. Just because it's legal to do something, doesn't mean it's a good idea.