I'm the one who processed the violation at the request of another poster.

The post that was removed for violating agora contained no useful information whatsoever and it was worded not as an attack on a specific idea, or even a certain poster, but it was an attack on anyone who thinks outside boundaries set by the offending poster. I was inclined to agree with the poster who sumitted the report.

Sometimes censorship is easy to identify - like when a post is removed. Other times it is more subtle - such as the suggestion that you are a some sort of pumper if you mention Apple. I think there should be freedom to post about possibilities as long as the poster makes it clear that a certain amount of speculation or assumption went into it.

The post that began this fiasco was mine, and I bent over backwards to identify the idea as far reaching speculation. Fairchij agreed with Sol's assessment infact.

I agree that the Apple spec has probably run it's course and we can just wait and see what developments take place going forward. If you want to see how balanced posts can be effective take a look at Aves last few. I agree that Apple may want to remain in the shadows until the 100nm gate is demonstrated. But his post doesn't discourage others from posting. That's the difference.