You either have problems with censorship (or moderation, if you want to use a more moderate term), or you have problems with raving lunatics and trolls scaring everyone else off your platform...
You can't justify censorship by across the board smearing censored people as "raving lunatics" or "trolls". The "scaring off" excuse for censorship works for forums like HN, but it doesn't work for social media sites, since on those you choose whom to follow yourself, and even in the replies to posts (of yourself or people you voluntarily follow, and whose followers are likely similar in opinion to yourself!) you can selectively mute or block people. So individuals do not actually need any additional censorship.
That's a fantasy solution. Person A can send you abuse, so you block them. Person B though is free to send you abuse, and so can the next 10,000 people. They might be a minority but even if you block them all, you've still received 10,000 hate messages and you have to spend a lot of time doing your own policing.
And then everyone else still has to wade through all this crap, or see "blocked message" everywhere.
Moderation is essential for most online communities.
And then those 10,000 people can do the same to everyone else.
> Person A can send you abuse, so you block them. Person B though is free to send you abuse, and so can the next 10,000 people.
That's a completely fantastical example. A normal person will never have close to unmanageably many replies. This is at most a problem for celebrities, which can be granted other solutions, e.g. only people they follow can reply, which solves the problem.
> Moderation is essential for most online communities.
There is a big difference between forums and social media, where you choose your own filter bubble anyway.
