Any policy at all might be preferable.

But is it really very fair (to use the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team's word) to introduce any policy, principles or terms other than those that Max wished and the original contributors to our forum were first attracted to and continue to be happy with?

This what was made it a special place - do we want it to be turned into the same as every other ordinary forum? An ordered but ordinary forum where this or that not permitted and you are only allowed to do this in this way?

I find it ironic and sad to now be accused by the Chief of the Mudcat Editing of contributing anti-Mudcat posts.

How are such posts now defined? That any view posted that does not agree with the constant changes and restrictions that the Chief of the Mudcat Editing team still wishes to impose upon our forum - will be viewed as an anti-Mudcat post?

I continue to be one of the biggest supporters of Max's concept of our forum and I accept the reality that I will not see things posted that are to my taste. To be accused of being anti-anything because I may not agree with my fellow poster and now Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team latest restritions to impose on our forum - is not acceptable to me. I can probably put up with the example he sets of publicly being calling me a 'buffoon' and worse by him - but to accuse me of anti-Mudcat posts is too much.

If the Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team wishes to be universially loved and admired and to see only what is to his taste on this forum -perhaps he should realise is not going to get his form of required peace here. Perhaps it is time that he formed his own forum - rather than continue to wish to change the best aspects of our forum.

Then peace may have a chance on our forum.