It depends on what you want out of a search engine. Do you want a search that tries to give you what it thinks you want? Or do you want a search that functions more like a library index where you're going to get what you searched for, even if that might ironically not really be exactly what you wanted - so the onus of creating a more correct search term is on you.

This isn't a rhetorical question of course. There are major arguments for both. But I think a pretty good chunk of DDG users were more often after the library index than what ideally would be a librarian recommendation, but in reality is more like a stereotypical used car salesman style recommendation.

I would be fine with either. But what I really don't want is a search engine that gives me what it thinks I should want.

The whole point is to have a place where you can see shite if you want. I don't need an online nanny.

I might agree with shite. Or I might wish to read it for my own amusement. Or perhaps I want to argue against the shite, in which case, I need to know what shite is out there. In any case, it doesn't matter. I only need the search engine to be an intermediary, not a curator.

Besides, if someone accidentally searches for shite, he can revise his search terms. Just like how you might reword something if a listener was confused.

This "curation" just doesn't need to exist. But that's a moral argument and those applying censorship aren't moral, so won't be partial to it.

Yes, the Overton Window must be enforced. We have always been at war with East Asia.

Removal of TPB was a positive too. Can't imagine how much loss of revenue these pirate sites have caused over the years.