Make it pull instead of push. Each user has way too little control over their own experience in my opinion. To me from an old-school-internet background, it's very weird that a moderator can override what comments you're allowed to see or not allowed to see. I much prefer Bluesky's model, where you pick your moderators, and someone can't override you and decide that certain comments you're not allowed to read just because those comments happened to land within that person's little domain after they were the first to claim the "worldnews" name for their community or whatever.
How to graft that onto Lemmy is a little bit difficult. It's just a different model. I mean you could have a list of moderators whose decisions you want to block (similar to your list of users you want to block) -- if any of those moderators removed a comment, you can still read it, their decisions just don't affect your feed in any way. That would be a simple hack, sort of a useful check on their "power" if you want to say it that way, although it's definitely a little bit rough approach. Probably a more holistic way would be to restructure how content even gets shared around. I haven't looked at how Piefed does "feeds," but that might be one good approach; let someone create or share a "politics" feed for example, and it can be a modification of someone else's feed ("!news@lemmy.world but take out the Trump stuff" or "block these specific annoying users" or "ignore decisions by these two moderators"), so that it's not a monopoly in terms of who gets to curate and control the content. You could subscribe to !betterpolitics@lemmy.world for example, and it's just the identical posts sourced from !politics@lemmy.world, but with some users that are widely disliked banned, and then also with certain moderators who consistently make bad decisions disabled. That's a lot harder to implement of course... IDK, this is just me thinking out loud about solutions I could see, but hopefully it makes some kind of sense.