The run-up to the recently concluded municipal primary elections provided excitement across the board. It happens every four years (although mostly we wish it were every year). There was electricity in the community, and most of it was positive current. There were, however, times when we told one another that Election Day could not possibly come soon enough. The weekend before the vote was one such occasion. We had “warring factions” going at it through letter-writing campaigns, and we had some borderline incendiary comments on our web sites. It’s fine with us if a letter writer or web commentator responsibly states his or her case for or against a certain candidate or proposal, but when it gets personal we step in and remove the offensive type. Some posts could have been construed as being libelous, and we’re not about to be a party to that. Certainly, elections bring forth all manner of emotions. Our take is that if one wants to make a difference through words it should be done with measured clarity. Much of what was dealt with at Current boiled down to “he said-he said,” and a lot of that was mean, nasty stuff. We’re not about that, and we don’t care to be associated with it. On the other hand, a lot of thoughtful writings were sent our way during the past month-plus, and we published those with dispatch. Is it our sanitizing practice simply censorship? It isn’t in our view. If there exist standards and those standards are violated, then we believe it is within our right to restrict or deny access to publishing on any of our platforms. One may make a point without being vicious, and many do it well. Of course (wink), this doesn’t apply to our writings about the federal government. To those that voted, thank you.