that site routinely indulges in slander and defamation of its subjects .. which are civil rather than criminal matters .. nonetheless, not 1a forms of protected speech unless it has the affirmative defense of being truthful.

in some cases it hosts published content that is criminal on paper (federally: non consensual intimate images under take it down act, or state charges: PII under californias anti doxing law just to name one. There are others), this simply has not been enforced or litigated successfully, nor defended on strictly 1a grounds yet.

So far it has racked up multiple successful defenses hiding behind section 230, not 1a.

There have been a couple of incidents where someone may have had standing to sue a poster (on any of the aforementioned grounds) who “could not” be identified. [0]

At the present time 230 keeps KF itself from being a defendant.

[0] The same guy who tells cops and courts that he shreds his logs after 30 days somehow finds a way to call out a user who has exclusively been using Tor for two years, (oh. Now he has logs going back several years.) but I digress.

Well there’s an opinion not to take too far...