The two are nothing alike.
If someone posted something like you typically hear in your typical open chat on GAF, the moderation would ban them instantly. It's not like GAF is the soundtrack for another game that we're playing, this is a forum. We come here specifically to read the posts.
Also, it's not like I "can't handle" hearing open chat, that would imply that it's a deficiency on my part, and it isn't. It's simply that I don't want to hear open chat.
Your snark is both unnecessary and easily proven false.
It's not that I can't handle it, it's that I don't want to bother with bigoted dicks. Why would I want to subject myself to listening to that trash? GAF is the only forum I use and most people get banned for saying the sort of thing found on voice chat all the time. And if I find someone on GAF who says mean stuff like that, then yeah I'll put them on my ignore list.
Let's approach this from a different angle:
SCENARIO A
1. Players hears people on chat saying things they don't want to hear
2. Some of those players turn off voice communication completely
3. Non-vitriolic players with mics cannot communicate with those deaf and mute players
4. Non-vitriolic players with mics get either "deal with it" or find a full party to talk to if they want to play the game as it was designed to be played
SCENARIO B
1. Players hears people on chat saying things they don't want to hear
2. Some of those players mute ONLY the offending people on chat.
3. Those players also report the offending people to Steam, Xbox Live, PSN, and the developers for violating TOS
4. Non-vitriolic players with mics can still communicate with those players who only mute the bad communicators
5. Target muters and non-vitriolic players alike with mics can both play the game as it was designed to be played
6. Through communications and complete bans from reporting, less people will potentially have to deal with vitriolic players in the future
SCENARIO C
1. Players hears people on chat saying things they don't want to hear
2. Some of those players turn off voice communication completely
3. Non-vitriolic players with mics cannot communicate with those deaf and mute players
4. Non-vitriolic players with mics either "deal with it" or find a full party to talk to if they want to play the game as it was designed to be played
5. Non-vitriolic players with mics say "fuck that" and start campaigns to add communications as a matchmaking factor.
6. Non-mic players get grouped together to enjoy silence together and play the game how they want to play it
7. Vitriolic players lose their mic privileges and get put into the Non-mic group because who cares how they want to play
8. Non-vitriolic players with mics get to play the game as it was designed to be played
Scenario A is the current model. Non-mic people like it because they sacrifice nothing at the expense of others i.e. people who want to communicate for teamwork purposes. Mic users who want to play Competitive games properly instead get stuck with deaf mutes and racists in every game (I can haz hyperbole too)
Scenario B is a compromise model. Both current non mic users and mic users work together to mute and report the vitriolic people and make online gaming a better place where good communications are not just a possibility, but a likelihood.
Scenario C is what could happen when people who want to communicate get fed up with the current model and decide that being told to sacrifice and deal with it isn't cutting it for us anymore. Sure, it might not work, but then again, it might.
Also, to all the "omg how could you say that vitriolic people should be lumped with the non mic users?" Guess what? YOU'RE ALREADY PLAYING WITH THEM. You've made it a point to say how every game you've ever played had horrible people in it, well, we believe you now. So if your mics are off now and you have no problem playing with them, you should have no problems being grouped with them specifically later. You can't hear or talk to them anyway, so who cares?