I am of mixed opinion on this; I think that LW should not welcome some behavior, and I pretty confidently include moralization as a behavior that should not be welcomed. There are times and places where honesty is more appropriate than reticence. The emphasis placed here on rationality and correctness has the cost of making it less friendly than if we did not have those focuses. That said, I think that friendliness is generally good, and would like to see more of it, and would like to take actions that increase it at acceptable cost.

I'm not sure what you mean by "moralization". The word has a connotation of disingenuousness, I think, and if that was intended then I dispute that it is an apt characterization of what I have said on this thread. If all you mean by "moralization" is "making moral judgments", then I'm not sure why concern for honesty, rationality or correctness would conflict with moralization. My interpretation of your claim is that if users believe that expressing their controversial beliefs will lead to moral condemnation from other users, they will refrain from expressing those beliefs and that is a net loss to the community. But moral judgments, if honestly made, are also expressions of belief (at least if you're a moral realist, which I am). So really a norm against moralization would discourage expression of one class of beliefs in order to encourage expression of another class of beliefs, and it doesn't unambiguously promote honesty over reticence. Now, I do think that in many contexts moral language has a mind-killing effect; it's often deployed in order to avoid thinking about uncomfortable ideas too deeply. But I haven't noticed that being a significant problem here on LW, and it's especially not a problem in this particular context.