I reread Hazel's and my posts to see if I might be crazy, and if we were indeed doing all these terrible things you accused us of, including metaphorical book burning. I'd like to think that I would recognize the Fahrenheit 451 impulse in myself if it emerged. But that's just not even close to what happened here. Hazel criticized a particular comment you made which I happened to agree was unnecessarily discouraging. Neither of us were trying to move things "into some narrower lane" of discussion. When you start by telling someone to "quit immediately," the discussion doesn't need more narrowing.
Instead of acknowledging the obvious, that alienating new or potential members of MG is not a good thing, there's mostly been lashing out and doubling down. Indeed, the only person on this thread who has apologized (twice) is Hazel. Now we've reached the reductio ad absurdum of refusing to give an inch, which is that criticism of you equals "policing." By that logic, any criticism you don't agree with, or which isn't presented deferentially enough, is attempted censorship and an existential threat. You conveniently cast yourself as a champion of free speech and those who disagree with you as villains. It's self-serving. It's false. Even if Hazel and I did match these caricatures you've drawn of us, do you actually believe we would have any chance of succeeding in our scheme to stifle free expression? If so, that's giving me way more power than I have or want, and others less credit than they deserve. This community may be small, but most of its members cannot possibly be that brittle.