h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I'm choking on my cappuccino here.

I mentioned in a posting (http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/FFM20617?thread=104888&skip=60&show=20#p909132) that the Shrek website was worth checking out. Then, knowing the sensitivity of posting real urls, I merely said that the url was obvious.

And that got moderated out and replaced with the misleading "[URL removed by moderator]".

Surely this is going too far.

If the moderator felt that you were posting a URL, by 'getting around' the rules it would be okay for them to remove it, after all it is so so easy to get around that we have to allow some room for interpretation. You were potentially directing someone to an external URL after all.

Sorry, but for the time being no URL's can be placed in conversation postings.

Even fictitious ones? While trying to ascertain the reason for Kaeori's original moderated post, I was in turn moderated for suggesting the form of the infringement: an 'example'.com with a www prefix. Not seeing the original post, I had only a vague idea of what was being alluded to, so the example I posted was straight off the top of my head.

Forgive me, I'm not angry and I don't believe my basic human rights have been violated. I'm just curious.

It seems I was 'moderated' for saying that the film Shrek has a website and that you could make an educated guess as to its url.

And with the best will in the world, Peta, I really think it shouldn't have been censored.