Now I admit I was made clear about that taboo by a couple of high powered people on these mbs (not folder managers I should add - hope "folder manager" is the right term). And I do admit that I ignored that censorship warning.
I am not aware that any Admin or Moderator of these mbs has issued a 'censorship' warning to you, Carol. Nor made any indication that there is any taboo about critiquing stories (provided it's done in a civil manner). I will of course, check with them. However, I am sure none of them will mind me making quite clear to avoid any further confusion that there is no such taboo currently operating on these mbs and that any polite, civilised discussion of a story is more than welcome. If any Admin spoke to you about this, it was at an entirely unofficial level and not a reflection of board policy.
Anyone who is not clear what polite and civil debate constitutes can read the boards FAQ on what is and what is not permitted. If you are still confused, you can of course email one of the Admins who will be more than delighted to help you understand the rules.
What anyone else tells you cannot be considered official board policy and so can be safely ignored with impunity.
The problem with your recent comments on this story, Carol, has nothing to do with such emotive words as 'taboos' or 'censorship', but everything to do with the fact that many reading them have not seen your comments as simple 'questions on characterisation' at all, but something a little less civil. The way that several of your comments have been worded has not helped dispute that impression, as they've tended to give a sense of something a little more intense than simple curiosity or a wish to debate in friendly terms.
Whether you intended them to read that way or not, this has been the general impression given by them, and that is why you are being challenged on your motives.
You are, of course, more than entitled to discuss this interpretation - false or not - of your posts with anyone else. As they are entitled to challenge you. So long as it's kept civil. But let's not get carried away and make this into a board conspiracy against you or a wider issue than it actually is.
Were there genuinely a taboo against friendly characterization debate, or a will to censor, the threads on this subject would have been closed down long before this, I can assure you!
Usually, someone actually has to have been censored before complaining about being censored. Had any of your posts been removed or had you been set to 'no post' or expelled from the mbs, you might have a case. But a few posts from your fellow board members challenging your viewpoint and motives certainly doesn't qualify as censorship imo when the debate is being left...well, uncensored.
If you choose not to argue your viewpoint, Carol, that's a conscious choice taken by you not to post again. A quite different thing entirely from someone else taking that choice for you and your freedom to post away.
LabRat