I have posted this reply as a comment for the post:
As a long time, and continuing, admirer of yours, it is very disappointing for me to read this as it is a sign of a personal failure by me, as part of Lib Dem Voice team, to sufficiently communicate with you to iron this all out.
All I can say is that we are doing our level best to try to have a consistent comments policy, as developed over the last year with the readers’ input.
If we have failed to keep yourself on board during this process, then that is a failure of ours.
Ok, I am a member of a clique. I volunteer to help edit the site for no reward. I suppose you could say I get a power buzz from modating comments. It doesn’t feel like it. I would compare our policy to the BBC who have a similar strong moderation policy.
All I can say is that there are about 20 coments a week rejected and the people who have comments rejected cover a wide spectrum of parties, no party and roles within the Lib Dems. We don’t single people out and we agonise and consult on comments queries.
We should do better because we need to keep yourself and others on board.
Having said that, I have seen the comments rejected from some party luminaries and they seem absolutely justified from my reading of the policy. If someone writes “I wish David Laws would go and jump in a lake” it gets moderated – a milder example. Some party luminaries think that abusing people is a sign of vigorous debate. I am proud that our policy is trying for a more civilised atmosphere on the web. We don’t always get it right but we are trying.
When I reject comments I almost always consult the policy to find the specific relevant words.
And we often email those whose comments we’ve rejected.
Having said all that, LDV is just a site run by volunteers. We do not claim any monopoly. If Lib Dems want to set up other sites, then they should go for it.