>Next time, please, do let me know in private because going online like this. This has provided a very bad image about the UT and in a matter of a few messages after, it provided a lot of wrong assumptions on the site.

I had no intention to do anything to the image of the UT, probably because of this atmosphere of a few dozen of us writing here. I thought that whoever removed the message was blindly following some rule, and my take was that the rule was enacted after some very vocal group of users demanded it, and the others were asleep at the helm or just silent. My intention was to raise some equivalent noise _inside UT_ to challenge the rule, under the assumption that the group who pushed for it may have left meanwhile.

I also didn't feel this was your doing at all (because you'd email me first, like you always did), so I guessed, wrongly, that you were absent.

Sorry for the inconvenience, I couldn't imagine this would go anywhere beyond the chatter.