Censorship is binary, not a gradient. You accept any, then you accept all— no constitution defining the censorship of speech can withstand semantic manipulation and the administration of language is determined by collective interpretation, which is a product of social mimesis. Any project of political, social or financial value will become a target of interest for an entryist campaign. Entryists are live players coordinating externally with a secret ruleset separate from the default uncoordinated agents; in any decentralized group whose political direction is determined by the collective, they can gain control through achieving majority voice by coordinating to uplift only those sharing their secret subscriptions, and quieting those who don't, until they carry enough political capital to subvert the group's social consensus to crystallize censorship organs and permanently silence the non-players. If censorship functions are not yet codified, they will advocate for it. In any decentralized group, resistance is only possible if the default ruleset encodes immunity against entryism. Even crypto, of all things, was convinced to bilndly accept this same censorship advocacy. It was just as inevitable that it was crypto to produce milady an immune reaction, and provide crypto its missing immunity function.