[spacebandit]

Whilst I agree completely with all who say that censorship is a bad thing - when it comes to forums such as this I'm afraid I have to say I would disagree with calls for no "censorship".

I've been on totally unmodded boards - they stop working. the line between legal and illegal, especially civil law tends to get crossed pretty quickly, and as it is the "publisher" who can be held liable, boards would come and go very quickly.

We live in a litigious age, no win no fee legal teams waiting to pounce - "money for nothing" as Mark Knopfler so succinctly put it. You may think that is extreme - but I've known board owners have to deal with complaint after complaint lodged with their ISP's and domain hosts that ended up shutting unmodded boards down

Also the boards will inevitably descend into a litany of threats and "internet tough guy" babble - and people leave, the people who leave are the very people you want to share a board with.

Even if things are taken privately away from the board - some people will always spill them back into the public forum. Its the way some people are.

Moderation can vary, theres good and theres bad and I've experienced both, no doubt as have many if not most of you, but for a community to build up you have to have it, thats a plain and simple fact on internet life, which is inherently anonymous at the front end.

Yes civil law can be used as a tool of censorship, some people - especially the rich attempting to stifle legitimate journalistic investigations for instance, under the "banner" of slander and libel are well known in this country - just ask the various editors of "Private Eye" magazine.

Free speech is free speech if it stays within the bounds of the law.
If the law is oppressive and designed to stifle free speech by the back door - work to change the law. It only takes one person to start the ball rolling.