Well of course. That's like a prohibitionist using the reduced alcohol consumption overall as justification. Data often suggests that prohibiting <thing> means less of <thing>.
The question is not whether the goal of the silencing is mostly achieved, the question is whether that goal is worth the precedent. If your goal is to silence at all costs, it will always seem worth it. You'll find the less forceful actions (e.g. ignoring, dissuading, etc), when possible, have less slippery trade offs.
Well of course. That's like a prohibitionist using the reduced alcohol consumption overall as justification. Data often suggests that prohibiting <thing> means less of <thing>.
The question is not whether the goal of the silencing is mostly achieved, the question is whether that goal is worth the precedent. If your goal is to silence at all costs, it will always seem worth it. You'll find the less forceful actions (e.g. ignoring, dissuading, etc), when possible, have less slippery trade offs.