These two are contradictory. If this platform were really decentralized then they would have never been able to even think about blocking anything!
Which is why I always say that just because something uses the word "decentralized" it doesn't mean they are really decentralized. In fact majority of them are heavily centralized. This goes for other names they use too, for example as far as I can tell Uniswap is not an exchange platform, it is a weak token swap platform.
Be warned that this can happen in any other platform too that claims to be decentralized but is either centralized or have some traces of centralization (like Bisq).
A decentralized exchange should be regarded as an action rather than a platform or a company because I doubt the latter can ever achieve true decentralization. A decentralized exchange as an action is basically a peer-to-peer exchange between individuals with no intermediary involved, where both parties run their own self-hosted instance of free open-source software that connects directly to a decentralized network like Bitcoin through a self-hosted bitcoin full node. The decentralized exchanges (deals) like this aren't possible on Ethereum, for example, because the underlying blockchain is centralized, and the vast majority people interact with the Ethereum blockchain through centralized platforms like Uniswap or privately-owned centralized wallets like Metamask. Everything that is built on top of Ethereum (second layers, third layers, sidechains) cannot be decentralized either because of the centralized nature of a base layer.