I was invited to ask the question so I will. What was the deal with the moderation in that thread? It was the most bizarre sequence of post, response, escalation (by a moderator) and moderation I have ever seen on this board. The original point was made, fair (and accurate imo) challenges to the point were subsequently posted and then it escalated into a discussion of intent of original poster vs. a response to what was literally posted. I understand wanting to protect some people, but the original point was made by a frequent poster, said poster seems capable of defending themself. So why did the responses to the responses escalate to saying the original responders were questioning intent of the poster rather than just challenging the original point made? Why this thread specifically? Is this going to be a common method of moderation going forward? (And for the record, I accept my penalty. I broke a rule that should be an automatic, no exception discipline)