It is impossible to decipher what is regarded as "fair" comment by the moderators on, for instance, current international affairs.
I would have thought it would be best practice to inform posters of the set of principles that moderators actually base their decison making on.
It is disconcerting to notice various pivotal members moving on/being banned. I suggest it would be in the best interest of HC owners to provide all and sundry why the decisions to ban/delete/suspend appear neither to be transparent or consistent.
Please provide some examples of behaviour that is not deemed appropriate or even more of us will just give up.
