{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021739130434782608, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.554216867469879, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
To whom it may concern.

By far the greatest flaw is the removal of the onus of proof. In cases of ‘offence’ material evidence as currently understood in law would not necessarily be required, as the chief evidence is on how the complainant feels. Of course, in our society we recognize the importance of balance between free speech and hate speech, particularly where the element of incitement is involved. I believe this well covered by existing legislation.