Shambles and Bert, do you really think we need to take the time to post an explanation for these?
-Joe Offer-

Why not? And even if such posts remain in place - no online poster is going to be shocked by seeing such a post are they- as we all have gotten used to ignoring them. But such clear-cut examples as you have provided to justify your view and which will no doubt be supported - are not really the sort of 'silently deleted' postings and imposed judgement and actions that really cause concern are they?

But even is such cases - with no indication given as to when and where it takes place - no poster on our forum knows what the true nature and level of censorship is. So they cannot either agree or disagree with your view from any informed position.

If there are no alternative ways of acheiving what is now judged to be required or these have failed and this imposition MUST happen - all that would be required is some indication where any form of imposed censorship action was judged to have been required and very brief indicaton of the reason.

Like the following:

Post censored - Offensive material.
Post censored - Abusive personal attack.
Thread closed - (And the reason why).

If this imposition is judged to now be required on our forum - what would be the harm in always openly indicating this? I suggest the most harm is done by those wishing to undertake it - being seen not to wish to indicate this and not providing convincing reasons as to why.