If a community makes a black list, it won't hurt free speech. Posters will reform the way they post to avoid getting on a community blacklist. That would promote civil discourse over time, which is something sorely lacking from bitcointalk at the moment.
Behavior modification achieved through censorship and/or the threat of? Splendid. More power to anonymous
devs!
Reminds me of George Orwell's
1984. "We do not merely destroy our enemies, we change them. Do you understand what I mean by that?"
"We do not destroy the heretic because he resists us; so long as he resists us we never destroy him. We convert him, we capture his inner mind, we reshape him."
This is comparing apples to oranges. In Crypto-Land, all it takes is a few posts to destroy a coin. There are many out there who make it a mission to destroy competing coins. This have become very problematic in the realm of alt-coins, especially those in the race for the best anonymity. I admit that I have been guilty of this myself, though it was a matter of retaliation. Letting the free market decide without people FUDing competing cryptos endlessly is actually not a bad idea at all.
The proof will be in the pudding.