I missed most of the original discussion. This is interesting because it separates the question of whether the scenario is a violation of the rule from the question of whether you would punish it.
Depending on other things which are left undefined, I might issue a ticket for the EMT and police vehicles. If they damage the park, then it has to be paid for, and this might be the most efficient way.
I struggle to see the connection with content moderation though. I think most people have a reasonably clear idea of the kind of place they want a park to be, and would apply rules that tend to make the park more like that idea. Where there is disagreement (should dogs be allowed without leashes, should model aircraft be allowed etc.) most people accept that parks vary in this respect and you might have to find a different one or else put up with some rules that are less than ideal for you.
Online communities that have moderation problems have them because there isn't a clear consensus on what kind of place they should be. HN is a good counterexample. There's a short list of guidelines that describe the kind of place it should be, and most people stick to that. Claims of arbitrary censorship are marginal and uncommon. But youtube, FB, twitter etc. - there's no social contract for these things. There's no vision shared in good faith by most of the users and the owners. In short, there's no definition of right or wrong. So moderation is going to continue to be difficult.
