Them good ol' moderation blues...

This is an old chestnut of mine, but... I've noticed in the reviews section a couple of instances where unfawning comments have been moderated down- simply because they didn't follow the rapturous praise of other postings on the same thread. This happened with "Zastrozzi" a week or two ago, and has just happened on Gordon's "Company" review thread today. Neither of these posts could be construed as trolling, slanderous or even mean-spritied; it's just they had the nerve NOT to say "This is the best (fill in the blank) I've ever seen...". Some of the critisisms offered were pointed, certainly- but well reasoned, and certainly nothing that amounted to hate-mail. In the case of the Zastrozzi one, it DISAPPEARED COMPLETELY from the site. I went back to read it again and it had simply vanished, and I've been unable to locate it again. And considering one of the chief admin folk here was in that particular show, one is tempted to smell a rat or two.... And this is one of the problems I have with moderation (as I've bleated about from the get-go); sure you can "moderate things up", but should you have to? If someone is silly enough to post something hateful (and I'm as guilty of that as anyone on this site) leave it up and let people respond to it. Don't hide it because it disagrees with the general tenor of the conversation. I like reasoned debate- if I want irrational stupidity, I'll read (or post on) facebook. I would have thought this site could withstand more open discussion. What are everyone else's thoughts? Assuming this hasn't been moderated out of public view.... Eliot McCann