>>"Right or wrong" maybe not, but for well managed communities on the internet, there are objective definitions for appropriate and inappropriate, based on shar

>>"Right or wrong" maybe not, but for well managed communities on the internet, there are objective definitions for appropriate and inappropriate, based on shared values and context. Objective in what sense? Consensus != Truth. >>If you leave it up to each individual to decide what is appropriate or inappropriate, and provide them with the tools to block content they consider inappropriate, that's a burden on them, because you're not taking care of it at the community level. You can't take care of anyone at the community level because a community as an indivisible unit does not exist. The word "community" is merely a label, an abstraction for the ideas and events that characters interactions between two or more different people. >>And if the community's strength comes from shared values, and you leave that up to each individual to decide, what's shared, and what sort of "community" is actually offered? Either this is a loaded question or you've really put the cart before the horse, but I'll bite. A community's value comes the achievements of its individual constituents. Shared values are not a required prerequisite. They naturally arise from personal observations and discovery, real or perceived. That's it. Every culture, superstition, law, religion was a consequence of personal examination by one person. What made these so-called shared values "shared" was war and trade.