I can definitely agree with that last paragraph. But I don't think Steemit will be exactly like this even in a year's time. I personally have an idea to create an application platform that adds a namecoin-like namespace and attaches account group memberships into it (This is why it is not just namecoin, maybe I could call it 'SteemHordes' or something witty like this). I have still yet to think of exactly how this can be a monetisable feature, but then on the other hand, it is a very very small quid of data, perhaps it can simply be a peer to peer distributed directory of sorts, that simply empowers users to filter their feeds more than the simple trending, hot, active etc.
When you factor in even such a simple possibility of fragmenting the entire pool of Steem discussion into a myriad of little subunits like this, there isn't really a need for moderation, although the more prominent group names might get the interest of trolls for being bigger targets.
Perhaps you will think of some element of this little idea that gives the possibility of both monetisation and creating a system of moderation. Perhaps, for example, the groups membership lists have to be multisig with designated moderators. Moderators could then reverse their signatures and a membership is removed. If this power is based on whoever registers the name first, and can be transferred, or even some kind of way of splitting this power so you have founder, and then you have a board, who if they agree, can exercise the same power as the founder.
I think, after a little elaboration upon the idea, that I may be onto something here. This would enable a system of moderation, and would simply function as a p2p protocol implemented by programs that query the main blockchain but also interact with the SteemDNS system. If name owners are responsible and moderate their little plots well, they will attract larger numbers of posters and readership, and thus votes. If they exercise good discretion, it will result in upvotes for good group membership curation.