The idea that Nazis are the special case where it is ok to censor people, has simply turned into the habit of labelling anyone you want to censor a "Nazi".

I don’t need someone else to tell me what is right for me to see. I would never do that to anyone else either.

We’re talking text here btw, so CP/gore/revenge porn don’t count because those can’t be transmitted over text (links aside).

This network would actually bring MORE moderation. People could subscribe to moderation filters similar way as in adblock. Antinazi, antiantifa, antilgbtq, anti-jehowa-witness... No extremism, just nice business and technical discussion. If some filter curator fails, you just replace its filter with another one.

what stops a "centralized" network from implementing the same thing?

The centralized network stops itself from implementing it. That's what it used to be like on for example Twitter, where people used blacklists. But Twitter didn't want that and they wanted to be the arbiter of what you should or should not see instead.

And if you want to do that as a centralized network, you'll be cancelled by one of services you have to rely on anyways.

> ...to be the arbiter of what you should or should not see instead.

I can understand the tendency if there's a business behind it, maybe they don't want the homepage to be filled with polarizing, divisive, or nsfw content etc.

But I do like the idea of letting users decide what they'd like to see other than on the homepage, where I would be Ok with some default filters. Maybe they can be disabled for the inclined.

Twitter doesn't have a homepage. It's just log in / sign up.

I wonder if that's by design? without careful curation it could be an abomination