Not really. Any open space is just going to be dominated by the majority viewpoint simply through numbers and if you don't have walled gardens it becomes impossible to discuss contrary perspectives. Most of the "critiques" that liberals bring to the table are just repeating the same talking points over and over, accusing us of being Russian bots or secret Trump supporters or whatever, and repeating the same pointless arguments over and over again.
Even if two people try to have an intelligent conversation in good faith, the fact that people are waiting to jump down someone's throat or take things out of context and go like, "Aha! This proves you're secretly an accelerationist!" colors the conversation and keeps everyone on guard. It's the same concept of if you let conservatives/reactionaries into a space, their perspective adds nothing to the conversation and makes it harder to discuss anything intelligently.
This is the whole concept of the fediverse, tbh. To allow for "walled gardens" that can still have opportunities to interact with each other. My ideas are far more challenged in spaces where I share certain basic assumptions than they would be by anything liberals or reactionaries have to say.