You have missed the point again.

I didn't attack the moderator for a moderation decision. In fact, I went out of my way not to do so. It is in my OP at the time. It's still there for all to see.

Read those threads again. Comments were posted which made accusations against me. When I repeatedly asked for evidence of what I was supposed to have done, none was forthcoming. Therefore, I made the comments you have quoted here. I attacked him for telling lies.

(And in any case, the moderator at the time was surfcrest. So why are you, defending him? Just wondering....)

it is only the judgment of the moderators and owner that it broke the law.
You are wrong.

A member who criticises the family will have their posting privileges withdrawn. No judgement required. The judgement was made years ago when the rules were written.

In contrast, I was banned when I did not break any of the rules. However, the ban (note the use of the word "ban", as opposed to "suspend") was made apparently after he had received complaints.

I've been pushed to ban members....so I'm banning members
Strange that at the time you didn't question surfcrest as to whether or not the "push" had come from a certain poster "with a longstanding and personal grudge".

You were uncharacteristcally quiet at the time. No indignation expressed then.

See what I mean by "inconvenient truths"? You are very selective indeed.

Moses, as owner of the board, has told you what happened. Whether or not you believe him is up to you.

To quote someone you know very well:

You can continue this argument alone with yourself in cyberspace.