>Steemit, I am told, does have centralized means of actually blocking accounts. I am told by a party (who I will not name, as I have no confidence in them whatsoever, due to their acts) that Steemit has blocked them from an account.

So then it's a matter of their word and lack of proof for this...

>I have no more information than this, but I do believe that websites aren't able to be rendered immune from such controls. It is simply the nature of code that, on a site served from servers under the control of Stinc, the users of that site can be censored.

It cannot. 

There's no incentive to giving the world proof of censorship. Hard Coding, ip blocking, wouldn't stop someone determined from bypassing hard coded front-end censor and demonstrating it if it was true, or anyone from documenting Ip blocking, or hard coded changes in the open source code. Demonstrating it in this case would be immensely incentivized, just imagine having proof of censorship on steemit, and there is no reason to think otherwise. 

There's no incentive and people that are determined will expose censorship, people that get censored won't take it lightly if it happens where and when it's promised otherwise. 

This is why when someone cries "CENSORSHIP" or outright lies and says they've been censored, it's important to dispel that nonsense and cut the root of that, what's the proof, can you demonstrate it?

It's easy to rag on the development or large accounts, and not saying you're doing that, just remarking on what most "censorship, censorship everywhere" is or amounts to, but I'm grateful that this isn't run by admins, OF ANY KIND, even those that are admins at the INC, or in the github  or the chat, hardly are admins on the chain where everyone has the same rights and is free.