Since forums deal with people, how is it possible to put sociology,
psychology and ethics aside as if the present time were a time from
several decades ago? Society as a whole, has moved on to the extent,
that minorities are given a voice that can easily be felt and heard
both in the media and legally. How is the Devuan Distribution going to
ethically justify its decision of letting abuse, whatever form that
may take, to take place on its infrastructure?

Every person should enjoy equal rights, but reading some of the
preceding argumentation, gives the ethically questionable message that
some people have lesser rights than others. I am using 'lesser rights'
to signify the implied message that people with disabilities or with a
weak personality are better to stay off public forums. This is
discrimination which is hard to ethically justify. Disabled persons,
both physically and mentally, should enjoy the same rights. However,
without moderation this cannot be achieved. They are simply shooed off
like annoying insects that land on a dinner table in the wrong time.

Whatever some may say, the world as a whole, is moving towards a
better place to live in with more social acceptance and legal rights.
Supporting the notion of a forum that is like the 'wild wild west'
flies in the face of that reality bringing back ghosts from the past
of rejection and intolerance.

As I am a Devuan user who has contributed with my own time to the
project, I expect the project to adopt policies that respect
minorities wholly, irrespective of their characteristics. Other than
that, it is a pain to see policy adaptions that contradict what is
today so widely accepted as a basic right.

--
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
(Albert Einstein)
If you cannot make abstructions about details you do not understand
the concepts underlying them.