I have spoken about my issues with censors before. It generally doesn't work (except if you use it for a very narrow very definition issue with socially agreed illegal issues where there is broad consensus) and it hands uncontrolled power to others. Which isn't helpful either as it has consequences in its own right.
The trouble with censorship is you elevate the status of 'banned issues' if you don't handle it well. Think Frankie Goes To Hollywood as a great example.
I find that I don't I'm bothered by Tate followers on my twitter feed because I don't follow them and I don't tweet. I use twitter as a read only thing. Mainly because I know what twats are on the internet and why children shouldn't be on the internet and why critical thinking skills should be something encouraged by schools as an essential lifeskill.
I don't think that censorship necessarily solves the problem. That's the point. All it achieves is a game of whack a mole for those who are determined anyway.
Unless you have legal back up (which doesn't necessarily require police intervention) it's kinda pointless.
The riots earlier this year are proving interesting. Just over a 1000 charges have been brought. It's been reported today that 99 of those have been online offensives so I can see there being increasing awareness that online conduct is still subject to the law in the UK.
That's not going to solve the issue elsewhere though. So if you use any non UK based social media you are going to run into potential issues. You'll note my choice of preferred social media where I participate isn't us based.
The other issue with going too heavy handed with censorship is you drive dark web communities which I think are altogether more concerning as there is even less scrutiny and management.
I don't think there's an ideal solution here. I accept that the internet is what it is and that following historical precedent of technological change in communication it's still in its 'wide West phase'. This will fairly naturally settle down over time as the imbalances of power and debates over public acceptability of behaviour on the internet mature.
I've been on this web thing as part of communities for 26 years now. I know they go phrases as part of a life cycle. They change and evolve. They have a period of infancy of naïvety and innocent, go through almost a 'wild teen phase' and then sort of grow up. Musk's takeover initiated a new cultural phase.
I have to say that I'm genuinely not seeing more crap than I was seeing pre-Musk. There was huge amounts of 'not nice' stuff pre-Musk so I think it's disengenous to say that Musk taking over has led to racism. Racism has always been a problem on twitter. I wish it wasn't the case, but I also don't think you get rid of racism by being authoritarian and just 'banning it'. I think the idea you can is naive.
I have previously played an online group which was social media based. There were a number of individuals who cheated by setting up over a thousand accounts. The game owners (who we got to know) had an impossible task. They couldn't delete fake accounts quicker than fake accounts were created. They couldn't develop and maintain the game and have more time than the cheats had on their hands. It was an important lesson for me; if people want to do it, they will do. Upon the revelation, the community in the end split into those who no longer wished to participate as it ruined it and those who still wanted to play and found ways around it (if you have that many accounts, you can't actually play them all at the same time, and it becomes apparent fairly quickly which are the key problems accounts so they get focused on). Those with the skill and determination ultimately shone through the drivel.
Going back to twitter, twitter also reflects society. And society isn't always nice and does have racism. I don't think racism is ok in any way, but I also think that if you have a debate in which everyone is free to express views, a certain degree of that is going to include bad shit. Otherwise you have almost an elitest community which does reflect society and deliberately shuts out people. That doesn't end well either because it creates resentment, hostility and conflict in its own way. You reach public consensus by inclusion of all (including the baddies) and you 'progressiveness' can not be achieved without this process - otherwise it requires unnatural intervention from an authority. It's about contact and communication being used well and effectively rather than relying on the blunt instrument of censorship. Authoritarianism never wins hearts and minds.
I note that abandoning twitter, is somewhat perversely an admission that there is no intention or desire to try and win hearts and minds - that means 'progress' is a false state based merely on who hold power. This is all about understanding how liberalism works and how you make effective long term sustainable change last. The Trans agenda provides a good example of how not to do things.
I think part of the problem is that effective change and progress takes a long time. And in an impatient insta generation there simply isn't this understanding of patience so instead people are looking to 'quick fixes' which don't work.
If you want to see the world as it is, you can't have a really harsh censorship policy. If you want to have a world view divorced from reality and only reflects your values then there are other choices available. But this isn't necessarily healthy either. It's not 'safe' in real terms. It's creating its own issues.
To sum up, I think it's impossible to navigate 'correctly' because there is no 'correct' was to do things. There's way that work and each online space has its own positives and negatives. Some of which, people don't necessarily want to acknowledge.
I've pondered the question over censorship since 1996 - my thoughts predate twitter by 'quite a long time'.
I'm still not convinced by censorship as an ultimate solution to the problem - as much as I really hate certain behaviours.
(My caveat here that needs to be stressed is 'except if you use it for a very narrow very definition issue with socially agreed illegal issues where there is broad consensus'. An example of that would be child sexual abuse and images of abuse. And ironically this is where Bluesky, by their own admission currently finding themselves - having to prioritise these cases over and above others anyway. I note also that illegal activity tends to move from older established communities and technology to newer ones as the users / owners / law enforcement is behind the curve there and they move on as the above wise up as the community matures. This means that BlueSky is still in a period of 'naivety' which also isn't necessarily a good thing either. The idea that it's a 'nicer place' may expose people to trusting others too much...