Perhaps this will aid your imagination: "talk.maemo.org is not operated by Nokia. Do not post topics specifically addressing Nokia, as this is a community forum." An open letter to Nokia would be composed of topics specifically addressing Nokia, wouldn't it? It sounds like it would violate the above "thou shalt not". BTW: Some rules are necessary for free speech to exist, so don't try to imply that I disagree with that. In fact, I was in favor of the recent action taken to protect the Overclocking thread after one person demonstrated the willingness to write most of the posts in the thread, repeating his own point of view endlessly (and rudely). I have seen lots of rudeness towards what I would characterize as anti-Nokia points of view, and precious little action taken against that rudeness. I don't see any reason to give Nokia a pass -- I think that Nokia itself has been rudely silent on several issues. I think that many people here have a vested interest in supporting Nokia -- in many cases directly financial. Stronger rules will make it easier for those vested interests to use their power. Pointing out the fact that there are countries less free than this site as a justification is an extraordinarily weak argument. What's the next step -- pointing out that Nokia doesn't run concentration camps? I always laugh when people doing something bad point out that someone somewhere is doing something worse. Anyway, I don't think that this site is the root of all evil. I think that it occasionally missteps and deserves to be criticized for doing so. It has the tendency to use its power to bolster its goals. It is not entirely objective. These are common flaws, but flaws worth resisting.