This is why US First Amendment standards for freedom of speech need to be adopted everywhere, not with hundreds of "but this kind of speech is harmful to society" exceptions.
Protecting citizens from receiving the wrong kind of information about political matters? That doesn't sound democratic at all, much less like an important thing.
One of the earliest global bans was against user "russavia" - research him and you'll know what I'm talking about. After that I stopped following Wikimedia internals because it was 100% clear that they were now just completely arbitrarily banning people.
Remember, if you donate to the WMF, they will use that money to enforce "WMF global bans" against users trying to make useful contributions but who once looked at the wrong people funny.
At least voters who don't turn up are harmless. If all the people who voted for EPP-affiliated parties just didn't turn up instead, we'd face far fewer problems.
I am not completely sure where I stand on her substantive opinions in relation to trans issues. I think it's a debate where both sides make some good points.
But she is definitely right about the decline of free speech.
Remember when Internet censorship was a right-wing business friendly cause because it was mostly about copyright?
Now the Internet is so influential that many other excuses for censoring it have been invented, many of which are or can be left-wing, like "misinformation".
As someone opposed to censorship who thinks it is a good thing if we can exchange information through free association rather than having gatekeepers, I don't know anymore who my ideological friends are.
I don't know anything about NixOS, but this kind of thing can't be unfamiliar to anyone who has been paying attention over the last ~10 years.
Eric S. Raymond was right: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=6918