The debate about hate speech on #p2p what is barely mentioned is the absolutely key feature of P2P:
In P2P network *you* route other people's messages. If you don't like them, you don't route them and they're no longer propagating through the network through your node.
In case of the 2020 report that focuses on #ssb there's a single barely visible mention of this fundamental feature ("refusing to propagate their messages"):
https://rebelliousdata.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/P2P-Hate-Report.pdf
As consequence, P2P networks with explicit follow & forward mechanisms (as in Mastodon and SSB), offer probably the most effective tool for democratically driven prevention of vocal minorities taking over the public debate.
If hate speech is condemned by the majority of participants, they will simply execute their right not to forward it further through the network.
Now, if particular hate speech is however *not* condemned, then the problem is not at all in the network architecture...
In this NYT feature the P2P networks are basically pictured as a slower alternative to centralised social media outlets, zero mention of what P2P is really about:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/26/technology/big-tech-power-bitcoin.html
This is quite disappointing, as it completely misses the point of peer-to-peer communications which actually enable everyone to exercise not only their free speech, but also the less known logical extension of free speech being the right *not* to listen (aka "right against compelled listening").