Replying to your nested reply, I think you missed my point. As the original post author or community creator I would like to be able to commit to visitors and readers that I have irrevocably waived my moderation rights, and have that commitment displayed on the web site. In doing so I can differentiate myself from those who are unwilling to accept unmoderated replies, feedback, and independent input, including critical or contrary views.
Why require that this feature be enabled for authors who explicitly do not want it?
You keep saying "the web site" as if steemit.com is the only window to this content. It's not.
There are certain types of content (an example being the encouragement or promotion of pedophilia, or posts promoting violence against minorities) that we will never permit to be displayed on steemit.com, regardless of one's settings.
You can of course expect a post about this and full transparency regarding our decisions at such time deploying our already-drafted policy becomes necessary. I hope that we as a community can forestall that day as long as possible.
We also hope that once we've shipped the communities feature, with the associated blockchain-based advisory moderation, that we will expand that to all users and all posts, allowing anyone to publish their moderation opinions into the blockchain, allowing anyone else to subscribe to their opinions to filter the site based on the set of opinions they choose to apply. That is a reader preference, and if a reader decides to subscribe to the moderation opinions of @someterribleperson, if they decide a user or community is garbage and should be perma-muted, any readers that subscribe to them would then have those posts hidden.
It's at least 6-12 months away before we tackle such things, though, so there will be plenty of time for input from users during the process. In the short term, the deployment of communities will give us useful real-world data on the social dynamics created as a result of such a model.