To my mind an unmoderated site would give free rein to bucketmouths, and personal insults, pornography, unlimited spam, and proselytising by extreme political groups. It would mean for those who [allegedly] never venture downstairs, the prospect of non music topics being posted in the musical section and vice versa. I for one would almost certainly leave, and while that might please some, the other people who would also undoubtedly leave in such a situation would definitely be a loss to this site we all like so much.

Except for the spam - perhaps it would be accepted that this situation and list rather describes the position already reached by our forum - even with the current system of moderation that is supposed to be protecting us all from it?

Any loss or our forum's freedom to see the words posted remain as posted - in the way of imposed censorship could be justified by some significant improvement resulting from these imposed restrictions. If there is judged to be no improvement - by those who implement it - then what is gained and where is the justification for the freedom of expression that our forum has lost by this 'system'?

For the publicly expressed judgement of the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - is that these measures have failed to impose upon our forum the peace that he requires. A peace that he judges can only be achieved - not by a re-think and for him and these failed measures to be replaced by a fresh approach.

No what is formally and publicly suggested to Max - by the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing Team - is a change from what has always been the case - to one that would now restrict the public's access on the BS section and for all posts on the music section being subject to his approval before appearing there. This proposal seemingly ignoring that the problem is more with the current system being unable to impose peace upon its current members than any real problem with non-members.

Thankfully Max has not (yet) implemented such a change. However, the same measures that have failed - by the public admission of those who impose them - still continue to be imposed (and sadly the same old witch-hunts are encouraged)- to the same lack of effect. Serving only to encourage - what are judged to be the 'bucketmouths' and the 'personal insults' - by the example set by (some of) our 'moderators' - that the posting only of such things (from certain posters and against certain easy targets) is now acceptable posting behaviour on our forum.

No - a non-moderated forum is not a 'silly idea' - there a far more sillier ideas suggested and supported in this thread. It is however something to aim for. For there is no target for the current 'system' to aim for and no way of monitoring any progress towards that aim.

There are only plea for support and a blind belief that the world would end without the current Chief of the Mudcat Editing team, his known and anonymous moderators' continuing to impose their judgement upon our forum. Whatever the result of all this may be......

Whatever our views - there remains only one way to establish if an unmoderated forum would be any 'sillier' that the fashion in which our forum is currently and secretly 'moderated' - and that is to be brave enough to now actually try it.

But even change to a more fair, open and less divisive system - would be better than to just continue with the current failed, aimless and counter-productive 'system'.