@wjmaggos All I hear is "I want this censored for *everyone* because *I* don't like it." People who promote server-level censorship don't even see the slippery slope they're diving headfirst down.

As Raymond Chen was fond of saying, imagine if everybody did this. Freedom of speech doesn't exist because of content that everybody likes. It exists to protect content that someone *doesn't* like, because not everybody likes the same thing, and because without freedom of speech, eventually someone with power - someone who doesn't like the things that you like - will come in and force what *they* want onto you.

"But this particular content is universally bad! Nobody should like it!", you might say, because you literally didn't comprehend the previous paragraph. There are people out there who would say exactly the same thing about abortions, transgenderism, climate change, and women's suffrage. I guarantee there is someone out there who thinks *those* topics are universally deplorable and should be censored. Who are you to decide what everyone else may see, when that other person can't?

This is a problem that is fully solvable with user-level content filtering. Letting users choose their own level of participation for themselves is the ONLY equitable way to do it. Everything else is just forcing your own sensibilities onto others.