No Joe, you don't get the censorship issue. And I'd say you have travelled quite a ways down the slippery slope already. You censored a thread I started on Kurt Vonnegut interview, which wasn't related to any other discussion. Your reason? It was (your word choice) "frivolous" and I was "abusing my thread-creation privleges".

Fine and dandy. I'm the guest a lot of people love to hate, so of course no one will come to my defense.   But then you went after Bobert, a guy some people love to hate, because they disagree with his politics and are "tired of war". Kind of reminds me of that poem by the pastor..."First, they came for the Jews, but I wasn't a Jew, so I did nothing." That is the dynamic of what is happening here, though of course I understand the two aren't remotely equivalent in terms of outcomes.

You don't like the PEL threads, you start needlessly messing with people in those threads. You don't like the war threads, you needlessly start messing with people in those threads. Don't like me, one of the prolific guests, you start messing needlessly with me.

The point is Joe, the "rules" you are applying aren't being applied equitably. They are being applied selectively, to people and subjects you personally don't like. You are being petty and vindictive. But worst of all, you are setting a very bad example. If you don't want people to initiate flame wars, then why are messing with certain posters you obviously don't like? That is an abuse of your power and authority in your position at Mudcat.

A link to an interview with Kurt Vonnegut is somehow a danger to the delicate balance at Mudcat? C'mon.