The best ideas, thoughts, and content should always win out. Flagging content because it hurts your feelings, and then getting a "central authority" involved to review it requires resources from the central authority that could be better used towards improving the platform.
Users, not a central authority, should be able to cast out village idiots. Perhaps an internal downvoting system that no one sees? Something like 5-10 downvotes removes the comment? No one likes getting a message from the central authority saying "you have been a bad boy and need to be better", but if by consensus, people agreed that your comment was not helpful to the conversation, that might send a signal to the person to be better.
Mute features are helpful, but with the layout of the platform it will not be as effective. How often are you going to see the same persons comments in the future unless they are spamming you or stalking your feed?
Idk it is a tough one. Less central authority though please. Also, hurt feelings should never be a deciding factor.
RE: Steemit and Decentralized Censorship: An Ongoing Debate