I prefer no comments at all.
Well, moderating is better than the "free for all zoo" that occurs with lack of moderation. And, I believe KMacD when he says that he does not "censor" comments at his site merely because he disagrees with them.
Unfortunately, the same cannot be said about other sites. Herein lies the problem with blog comments. Comments with no moderation will destroy a blog and drag it into a sewer, and also leave it open to Sunsteinite manipulation (which also occurs on poorly moderated blogs as well). However, moderation leave you open to accusations of deleting comments that effectively refute your position, thus yourself manipulating debate by eliminating certain points of view.
In contrast, I pick the simplest option: no commenting. Certainly, that incurs costs as well, but it is the most time efficient.
Of course, in the end, moderating and no comments are not "censorship." One is free to set up one's own blog to assert one's own opinions. A commitment to free speech does not carry with it the obligation to host all types of speech at one's own site. A commitment to free speech, for example, does not obligate a Negro to have a Stormfronter come to the Negro's home and spout anti-Negro remarks. On the other hand, the Stormfronter should have the right to say whatever he wants in public, and on his own property, including on Internet sites.