I believe you are right. I have heard OP's argument many times before, it is almost akin to the "you only need privacy if you have something to hide" and whatnot; same kind of mentality.
Everything could be used for nefarious purposes, and I do not think that is why we should "stop having nice things".
By their logic, we should get rid of encryption, too, completely.
You apparently read what you thought I was going to say and not what I actually wrote. This does not even begin to approach an accurate assessment of what I said or meant.
I'm saying that too many people in this forum are too comfortable completely ignoring the harm that Tor causes, and in order to make a good judgement call about whether to run an exit node the harms need to be surfaced. Full stop.
Everything else that you and others in this thread read into my comment is on you, not me.
Tor does not inherently cause harm, though. Similarly to how E2EE does not cause harm, nor do platforms (or programs) where you are allowed to exchange messages. Do you agree with the first statement or not? If not, what are the differences between Tor and IM software with E2EE?
> If not, what are the differences between Tor and IM software with E2EE?
I would never run an IM software with e2e encryption either, for the same reason. I don't want to be paying to move data that is being used to hurt people, no matter how many people I'd be benefiting in the process.
If other people come to a different decision that's entirely reasonable as long as they're cognizant of the harms caused and not in denial.
Everything could be used for nefarious purposes, and I do not think that is why we should "stop having nice things".
By their logic, we should get rid of encryption, too, completely.