Sticking to "add the ability to censor content" is horrible advice. Also, ALL tools can be abused. We have these guidelines propose to prevent the abuse inherent in muting someone.
The point of the policy isn't only to censor content that goes against community guidelines. The point it to be transparent about it, report the actions to the community, and allow them to reverse the decision.
We communicate the reason for muting an article and author so the community can play a role in determining if such an action is warranted. In this manner, we allow the accused author and community to play a role in managing the tribe.