Re: My two cents

<<<"For example, a private forum owner, known moderator or person with a fairly benevolent personna may wish to contribute and participate in the Debate Forums and keep to the high road but still not want to drag their known ID into it. In other instances, a forum moderator may wish to contribute to the forum they moderate without it looking like the post came from a moderator and either giving it undue weight or else opening up the moderator to complaints of being biased or having an agenda - especially from those who haven't gotten their way or can't handle disagreement.">>>>

What is the problem with the moderator being known, and posting under their own user name? This is at least honest. Moderators are entitled to their opinions, just as anyone else is. What is dishonest is a moderator using fake user numbers and names, which have no posting history, posting under these fake numbers, and then deleting posts of those that disagree with them, simply because they have the power to do so.

When moderators are deleting posts, with no warning, no accountability, and leaving the poster with no recourse to question the decision, (particularly decisions made to delete posts that do not breach TOS), this is called censorship.

Moderators should not be above questioning or scrutiny.

spud Tweet