[eternalban]

Make a cogent and non-authoritarian case for even having a "decentralized content moderation" which doesn't pass the "is this an oxymoron?" smell test.

> I'm building a large, chatroom-like service for TV.

So the profit motive is likely the motivation for applying a "central" doctrine of acceptable discourse using a decentralized mechanism.

> While I think that community moderation will inevitably lead to bubbles

Which allows for e.g. an athiest community to have content that rips religion x's scripture to shred (and why not?) in the same planet that also has a religion-x community that has content that takes a bat to over-reaching rationalism. Oh the horror! Diversity of thought. "We simply can not permit this."