NO, Roger. As Joe said on the Help thread, it is due to spam of the pornographic variety.

No.

Don't swallow this nonsense.

If the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team is seen, in pursuit of his own personal spats, to intentionally post spam posts of the pornographic variety (for example, what is now the first post to the first version of this thread) - this fight against spam is the sham that all the other assurances, excuses and justifications posted are.

They are all just given to enable our 'moderators' to do as they wish with the invited contributions of their fellow posters.

With the exception of course of certain posters seen to be favoured by them, who are now encouraged to post any scatological and pornograpic references and for these to be inflicted on our forum.

What is worse - examples of posts like these or automatically generated ones?

I don't really give a toss if unfair treatment like this is to now be the way so-called 'moderation' is on our forum and certain posters are seen to be encouraged to post what they wish.

Just as long as the pretence is not maintained that this treatment is open and fair and that its victims and those who try to post to demonstrate this and enable it to be freely discuss - are not publicy seen to be assured that it IS open and fair.

Those posters who wish to be seen to be supporting online bullying are welcome (by me at least) to do so.

But please don't maintain the pretence to yourself or anyone else that what is being supported is anything other than what it plainly is..........