maybe this IS one thread were it is wiser to 'hide' behind guest names
in order to concentrate attention on the issues..so as not to get distracted by 'personalities' and all the negative baggage that is carried over with them from other threads..

and I would suggest the main issue here under debate is Mudcat censorship and accountability.

Is it really the case now that it generally is thought to be wise to hide behind a guest name - in order to pass comment here? Or only safe to use one's own name to support these pointless deletions and displays of power?

It is not a question of whether the censorship is right but whether it works and if the price paid for it on a discussion forum open for the public's contribution - is worth the loss of freedom of expression - which is the end result. For all this censorship and passing of judgement - obviously has not worked.

The worse culprits of posting personal abuse are still contributing their abuse.

There is little question of Joe's 'job' needing to be filled by anyone unwilling to take it on. There will be no lack of volunteers willing to pass their final judgement and take action on the worth of other's contributions. But there is no need to worry for their is little chance of Joe ever willingly giving up this apparent 'job for life' nor much chance of it being prized-away from him.