In any event, this is simple censorship. How would you like it if I deleted your posts because I didn't like them rather than asking for evidence or explanation?
I have to disagree, it is not censorship, it is in the worse case erring on the side of caution. Please consider:
a) The original post was the subject of a formal report by a member, the reporter asking for deletion on the ground that some of the content published was provided to the author "specifically offline" - meaning private I assume.
b) In the conclusive remarks of the deleted post, it was stated that "Recently, it seems that "identity xyz" is deteriorating the quality of their "product xyz" to force freemium users to a paying product.
I have the dubious privilege of moderating these Forums, and I try to do this impartially. In this instance, I had to consider issues associated with potential breach of confidentiality and potential defamation. Two of us checked the potential defamation aspect, we could not find evidence of the claim made in the contentious post. Not having the benefit of legal advice, and mindful of the need to act with some haste to avoid possible litigations, I decided to remove the post,
inviting the author to restate his/her finding taking appropriate steps to avoid contentious issues.
I you are unhappy about this action, please lodge a complaint with contribs.
I have copy of the original post.