Very cool, if true

I'm interested that he tried to put some numbers on it, but I feel like the questions would need to be more specific to actually come to any conclusions. Do most students have the same idea what counts as "hate speech"? Does it make a difference whether someone is permitted to speak to people who specifically invited them, or invited to speak at a sanctioned event? Are we lumping together "offensive" things which are catastrophically harmful with ones that are not?

I admit, that, *in abstract* my answer to "should we use disruptive tactics including violence to prevent offensive views being heard" is "probably not". But if I'm subjected to an endless parade of speakers saying "lets roll human rights back 100 years" then disrupting them is probably right. But that means that question doesn't really tell you what it says it tells you.