When you say “any host being able to censor,” that’s really just each relay applying its own filtering policy. That’s not the same as censorship by a central committee; it’s decentralization in action because users can choose other relays or run their own.

This distinction matters a lot. We encounter the same confusion with Bitcoin: people call spam filtering “censorship,” when in fact filters are local choices that nodes make about what to relay or prioritize. No one can stop a valid transaction from spreading if peers decide to forward it. Confusing censorship with filtering makes it much harder to have a clear discussion about spam.