Can I put my 2 cents in now, being no stranger to controversial threads, edited or deleted posts and even a few locked threads myself I would like to say this:

Firstly, nicely put change of subject without addressing the continuing issues of the original thread doc clay, distraction and avoidance. truly a professional.

Secondly
The Anne Frank analogy was rather moving but I don’t see how her story relates to the original post by down, yes she wrote her story for all to see, has a form of escapism from the horrors she endured, ect, ect, ect. but ask yourself this, when the book was published was it edited? Or was it an exact copy word for word in the original context and original meaning in which she wrote it?

In fact it was edited, Who decided what did and didn’t go into the book that we all can read today, I think that is one kind of censorship that down is referring to, so I think that was a rather bad example to use to base your reply on,

The same basis applies to this site and many others on the net, censorship of freedom of speech, yes we all have differing views on the same subject, who is right and who is wrong I hear you ask? The correct answer is neither party, there is no right and wrong, just opposing views, each with there merits and demerits that effectively cancel each other out, To throw into the ring someone with the power to say this thread should be locked, edited or deleted because of..ect…ect…is negating the opinions of both or all parties involved and replacing it with there own opinion, this indeed is censorship,

Granted there are rules and regulations that apply on any site and in real life that one must adhere too to remain a member of said site or society, does everyone adhere to the rules all the time? the simple answer is no, exceptions are made for some, but not others, that also is censorship but in a differing form, still censorship,

This is where the line gets blurry, what do you do with the people like myself who refuse to be gagged even when society demands it? Online and in real life, all that society can do is alienate the minority that do stand up and make there voices heard whether you want to hear them or not, revolts have started for less, wars even less still.

Has you may know we have Speakers Corner in Hyde Park in london where freedom of speach is our legal right every sunday where we can voice our concerns about society or whatever tickles our fancy, but what a lot of people, mostly the tourists, dont know is that freedom of speach has actually been further restricted under the new anti terrorism laws passed in this country, the irish were resticted when we were at war with them from freedom of speach for over 20 years, now any mention of muslims, anti or pro have the same restrictions and you can be arrested , imprisoned without charge, and be forever more classed has a terrorist. both of these examples fall way short of the mark of "free speach" yet has a "free" society we have no legal recourse to appeal, where will it stop i ask myself?

The cold hard truth of the matter is no matter how many rules and regulations are imposed upon society online or in real life in the form of censorship, there will always be the minority that disagree and in some guise or form WILL have there voices heard.

That’s my take on the issue raised by downs original post

Feel free to edit this into a incomprehensible mess, it is not ment has a personal attack on doc clay, I would just like his opinion on this, no metaphors or analogies please just straight talk answers