I don't call that very harsh treatment.

Perhaps the best ones to judge the extent of any harsh treatment are the victims of it - rather that those (in this case an anonymous guest) who are not subject (currently anyway) to any special posting restrictions?

However, I don't think it has been claimed that this special treatment is harsh - but I suggest that it is foolish, pointless and most importantly - it is counter-productive.

For in all truth (apart form all fuss made and maintained in public about its imposition) - it would be hard for our forum to detect any change from the treatment my posting has been subject to - in the 6 years during which our forum was assured by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - that there was no personally motivated restrictions on my posting.

It is clear that all the forms of editing action that continue to be imposed are seen to be as eagerly imposed and justified on my posting now (and not on others) as they were before.

When all this time our forum was assured by the current chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - that all posters were treated equally.

The only difference is that after years of maintaining this to be the case - and of asking our forum to support this as being the case - the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team now feels brave enough to publicly admit what has always been obvious - that all the special treatment reserved for my posting only - was personally motivated.

As I have always maintained and evidenced that it was - and which evidence our forum was encouraged to ridicule and for which my so-called 'crime' in persisting with - instead of being bullied into silence or being driven away - these special posting restrictions are claimed to be imposed for.

No it is not the harshness of this special treatment that is seen to damage the credibilty of our forum and its 'moderation' - it is its dishonesty and the hypocritical double standards that are exposed by who this editing action it is seen to be imposed on - who it is not seen to be imposed on - and the real reasons for this display of unfair treatment by our 'moderators'.   

If our 'moderators' and their certain favoured posters wish to be seen to indulge in online bullying and others wish to support this (if only by not being seen to challenge it) - that may be OK - but let our forum not continue the pretence that this is something other than it plainly has always been seen to be.

It is my view that our forum deserves better than both this bullying and this pretence.

A pretence that seems to include our forum now being expected to forget that for over 6 years our 'moderators' claimed that they were there to protect posters from posts containing only abusive personal attacks and name-calling.

And expected to forget that our 'moderators' have not only set the example of being seen to indulge in such posts but are now seen to actively encourage certain favoured posters to indulge only in such posts and inflict them on our forum.