To me it makes perfect sense. What was had before was never free speech, hence why people who truly just spoke their minds were at one time considered ill, classified as autistic, or with tourettes or whatever. Notice the count of those is exploding now. Personally I don't think there is anything wrong with them at all, it is us who has the problem if we read more into their words than we should.

People think and say a lot of things they don't really mean and can regret if folk read too much into it.

What even is a promise, if we don't actually know the future? In a way all promises and all agreements are incinsere, we can never guarantee meeting a promise or agreement, so the dishnonesty was in making the agreement in the first place, both by the person intending to profit by it, and the person expecting to lose by it. If both parties thought they were going to profit by it then one or the other was wrong, the energy gained can only go one way or another, and so on, there is a logical argument to say that all lies are actually just sales pitch, and actually all speech becomes sales pitch, because if we say the wrong thing then we are cancelled. It is hopeless trying make up laws to define what is and is not free speech, again all parties trying to do so have an agenda, and will try to make deals no-one can keep. So the only way to deal with it is develop a thick skin, stop reading too much into what folk are trying to say, just understand a lot of the time it is emotional stuff they do not mean, and actually don't understand, if we are honest.

Anyhow, from a geek point of view, Metcalfes law is what should be elevated to statutory law, imho.

Nobody should have the right to prevent anyone from saying whatever thay want to say, however extreme, it is the only way we will ever moderate the actual extreme behaviour, rather than just the talking about it.