I got warnings over the Adblock fiasco (probably admitting its use, if I recall correctly... knowing my luck I get a warning for referring to a time I admitted to using Adblock, which is fucking stupid but hey-ho, watch Escapist forum moderation go) and, as a result, haven't logged in since then and stopped being involved in the forums nearly as much (I occasionally check out what's trending after watching Escape to the Movies, but that's it).
You're absolutely right that, ultimately, it's their community space and their choice how they run things- you're also right that one can't blame the moderators merely for enforcing the rules, however they also have a responsibility to not do so blindly. Nothing says that the rules they enforce are automatically reasonable or fair.
It's also worth considering motivation. Why do they keep forums? It attracts people who like the community and wish to engage in discussion. Such users also generate ad revenue (go figure, they're a money making business). It's not our responsibility as part of the community to help them make money, but what harms the community harms their ad revenue, so there is some mutual interest there to keep things healthy.
What's really silly about this thread (in response to the other) is that you're seizing upon the fact they were complaining about the moderators and conflating that with a complaint about Moderators (the official title for volunteer moderators), rather than members involved in the general moderation process, including the Community Manager and any other paid Escapist staff. The moderator who responds does the exact same thing (a little more justifiable as it's something they may have taken personally).
However it's also evidence of the continued unhealthy state of moderation on the site and how powerless users are (or think they are) to change that, especially now that more of the community is drinking the 'like it or leave' kool aid and gets angry at people not being happy/blindly accepting what is mandated. The problem with that is people do leave (at least, as far as cancelling their publisher's club, not logging in, making posts and using Adblock to deny the site revenue is 'leaving') and it's a massive failure if things end up going that far with reasonable people who were otherwise contributing to the community in a constructive way. For a journalistic organisation I would have expected a better track record on censorship.
You wonder why people care about moderation- people care about being part of the community. It's nice to belong. It's sad when that community rejects you and you have to leave, but it's worse when it's not the community that you have to leave over but the curators arbitrarily deciding that you don't belong there in a fairly successful attempt to censor otherwise reasonable discussion.
You might wonder why I'm posting this if I left... well, I'm one of those people who cared about being part of the community and had a fairly spotless track record until the Adblock fiasco, so I am a bit resentful that it came to that, but I also would like to see things change. I don't hold high hopes for that happening and it definitely hasn't happened, so while I accept that means going back to lurking, doesn't mean I'm happy about it.
