All of your posts in this thread would be deleted because you are attacking the internet board, the moderators and the owner. In most communities you would be banned from posting anything whatsoever. No other place would even give you one thread to bellyache in like Max does. You really have it good here.

And of course none of your posts would even appear on such sites - if you were not prepared to become a member of them. Unless of course you are a member of this one - who chooses for some reason to post here anonymously?

And in which case you (unlike others guest posters who post here but who are not members) would have nothing to fear from the changed proposed here to exclude them from posting here, made by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team in his (for the record) statement and whick would explain why you appear to support such a radical change.

Like others here - you continue to defend the principle of 'moderation' whilst ignoring the reality of what is actually happening in practice. Which is the obvious abuse of the principle of 'moderation' you defend.

Rather than ignore it - can you please address and defend (if you will) that - not for the first time - the two entire threads which were 'silently deleted' by some anonyous fellow posters when there were no grounds to and when no one but the 'moderator' concerned was aware of this action? Do you judge this to be an acceptable practical example of the principle of 'moderation'?

Or an abuse of it?