You'd probably see my parenting as "hippy-dippy" too. But it's about as ridiculous to assume that parents who are more laid back than you are "completely child-centred" and let their children do whatever, whenever, as it would be if I assumed that because you are "strict" and agree with smacking, that you dictate every second of your child's life to them, dole out beatings for every misdemeanour, and never cuddle them just in case it turns them soft.
Listening to your child's opinions and wanting them to be able to express themselves or stand up to someone who is behaving wrongly towards them does not mean that you don't teach them that it is rude to interrupt someone.
Choosing not to use arbitrary unrelated punishments and (shock horror) not punishing at all for certain things (but choosing to teach the lesson another way) does not mean that you never do anything that might upset them, or do anything that might look like a punishment. Of course you take a toy away from a child who is about to break it or hurt someone with it.
Just because someone is more relaxed than you over certain issues like bedtime or food or whatever doesn't mean they have NO boundaries. Perhaps their priorities are different to yours. DS co-slept and woke in the night until he was over 2, but he's almost 3 now and asks to go to bed most nights, me and DP are the ones saying "Just five more minutes!" I have never had a screaming tantrum from him over not wanting to go to bed.
I'm sure it's the case that some parents pander to their DCs and take great pains never to upset them and follow their every whim but I'm tired of the same assumptions being doled out to every one of us who dares to say "I don't really like the word naughty" or "I think that Supernanny is all wrong" or that they don't agree with time out or smacking or that they have a fussy child or or or I could go on.