My opinion, for what it's worth.

As you (along with the rest of our forum) currently have no way of knowing the true nature and current level of censorship - your opinion is not worth a lot. Would it not be better to have all cases where imposed censorship was judged to be necessary always indicated by an editing comment of explanation and all editing comments limited to only this? So that your opinion would then be worth something?

I don't believe there's any evidence this has happened so far (in spite of assertions to the contrary). If Max believes the mods are still doing OK in running *his* site then that's good enough for me.

I suspect that Max's view is similar - if our forum believes the mods are doing OK in running *his* site then that is good enough for Max. But how can our forum currently make any informed judgement?

As for evidence - here is plenty for those who are prepared to accept it. But no amount of evidence will ever be enough to convince those who simply are not prepared to accept it. The point of the suggestion is so that our forum would never again be asked or expected to take sides - or to believe accusations or assurances as they are now - but could plainly see the true nature and level of censorship for the first time and be able to judge and form an informed opinion from the evidence.

If there is nothing to hide - a change to such an open approach as suggested will only prove this to be the case and finally put and to all the division, all the name-calling and witch-hunts. The fact that such a suggestion to change to a more open approach is so violently opposed in some quarters - it could look as if there was something to hide.