What it doesn't answer is why serious discussions that branch off into real world discussions that will be coming back to SW discussions were suddenly a problem resulting in several unwarranted bannings. I think that's a valid question, and one which has been debated heavily on the boards, as everyone knows. But there is a line that is crossed. It's not a line that is set in stone, but one that is constantly changing according to the circumstance. For example, I posted these feelings in another thread as an example: Personally, I can't stand Stover's licensed writing. He's good at creating his own world, (ie the Caine series) but I don't think he is effective at all in capturing licensed characters. One of my biggest problems is that when Stover was posting in the forums, he would go on and on for pages if the discussion was positive, but as soon as a negative point was made, he would shut down and claim that he doesn't discuss his work. However, the positive interaction with the fans far outweighed his "quirks," and that's where the line was established. It certainly wasn't worth anyone getting upset over an interpretation of ficitional works. Personally, I think a body of work should include positive aspects, negative aspects, and constructive criticism. It's when one part is thrown out of wack that the line is crossed. If the community begins to be impacted, that's when we mods have to take action. Again, that's all just my opinion, but I hope it helps with your question.