that sounds right to me

And when we exclude free will as the OP was suggesting, thinking is impossible.

This implies necessity.

It looks like you're the one trying to explain away the mechanics of complex systems by stuffing free will in the hole.

I still don't understand why freedom of the will is a necessary condition for thought production. Maybe there is a mismatch between our concepts for thinking? I see thinking as holding information in memory, making links between pieces of information , predicting outcomes given priors etc. cognitive processes and brain computing stuff... Why is freedom of will necessary for that?

You brought up "...just be pasive points being overflowed with mental content..." passive thought means nothing to me. I was trying to figure out what you meant.

Of course most people, including myself act as though there is free will, but that is not relevant to whether it exists or not. It isn't a problem that needs explaining away, simply a thing that is not needed to explain anything. We made it up like we made up gods and money and plenty of other ideas that make life easier. Conviction that is exist despite "mystery" is not necessary.

... we would just be pasive points being overflowed with mental content, therefore thinking would be impossible.

I don't see how that follows. Do you simply define thinking as active necessarily? Passively observing thoughts is not thinking then? And how do you know that any given thought was active or passive? (I'm guessing its because you feel as though you "willed" it?)

anyway, interesting...