Monthly Archives: May 2007

Censhorship is Alive and Well @

The mods must be angry …

Seems that you cannot stand up to the mods at unless you want to be censored, then banned … and have the forum rules quietly rewritten, without a dated notice of amendment, to justify your banning. This is MY experience with the forums at (

The moderators, or perhaps just one of them, seems more comfortable editing their own posts and removing mine after I simply made a comment about their treatment of the forum’s members. I was simply commiserating with another member that felt insulted by a moderator.

Quite honestly I had forgotten about an incident with this moderator in the past, but also quite obviously this same moderator was waiting for my return to the forums. As I appear to be “IP banned” I cannot see how the threads I have posted in have been changed so as not to cast a disparaging light on the current RMCA staff.

Also, it should be noted, prior to being banned I sent a PM to the “founder” but have as yet to receive any sort of reply. Unless “You have been banned from this forum” when I try to browse the main web site is the founder’s reply?!

If this is what I can expect as a forum member at then perhaps it is best to leave this to the inescapable balance of karma.

As I said, it truly appears censorship is alive and well at This is also a truly sad state of affairs that a potentially first line resource would allow it … and it begs the question: what else has been removed because someone did not like it?

I will leave this matter with a quote from Voltaire, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

(Who would have thought this quote would get me banned.)

(PS: This ban was lifted approximately two weeks later.)


This post only had a few seconds of display at … they cannot remove it from here! It was my reply to this locked thread.

Given that the original thread was locked I am forced to reply here as I do not believe these points are salient in private messages.

LeesaLogic wrote:
Atticus, if you are responsible–and I’m not saying you aren’t–then you won’t risk your sweet ratties to harm by moving to Alberta. (The bold type is my emphasis.)


Now that is a more appropriate comment, thank you for seeing something of my points.

LeesaLogic wrote:
Once again, thanks to your antagonism, this thread is going no where. If you want to fight with me, you can take it to PMs. Otherwise, further unhelpful, antagonistic comments will be strictly moderated.


I’m getting the distinct impression you are threatening to personally moderate each and every one of my posts … now that is being singled out!

LeesaLogic wrote:
You make no secret that you don’t like RMCA moderatorship and this time around I seem to be your target. Do you think your antagonism is really helpful to the atmosphere?


It’s not that I do not like RMCA moderatorship, I don’t appreciate some of the moderatorial comments that are made. IMHO, all posts by a moderator, any moderator, are a reflection of the forum, it’s ideals, it’s general membership, and last but not least it’s owners.

IF you consider my “Devil’s Advocate” ( has a clear definition) stances, as I originally prefaced my involvement in the “Baytril” thread, to be antagonistic … then yes, I believe it is helpful, the idea is to bring about an open discussion.