with deleting ttccrr's earlier post. Who is reporting this as a violation, on what grounds, and who is deciding what we can and can't read ?

I can understand that some people might not like his writing style, or that he tends to disagree with the 'rosier-than-thou' party line, but I (and I'm sure many others) find his perspective at the very least interesting and informative. I do not necessarily agree with all or any of what he says, but it is usually on-topic, (I believe) honestly-held opinion, and potentially relevant to our current and future positions. 

I am a big grown up who is able to decide how much credence to place upon information given on an anonymous board. I do not need some moderator of questionable knowledge, ability and motives to excersise parental controls on my behalf. With the amount of violable off-topic in recent days (see section 3 of the TOS agreement), I would reckon that about 50% of all users could/should be banned. I cannot imagine that ttccrr's guff is any worse than can be attributed to many 'reputable' posters, and I resent having to imagine what he said in the first place.

If you don't like it then skip it, ignore it, or argue with it. Censoring it doesn't benefit anyone, and detracts from the whole purpose of a board of this nature.

rant over, thank you ;)