It is not. I have had discussions through messages with some members of the moderation team in regards to my posts being invis'd for no other reason other than it criticized the unofficial balance patch and it's leaders; I even have screenshots of these exchanges.
Send me the screenshots by PM, kindly.
There's one exchange where the mod went back and undid his moderation because they had no justification for it other than "I didn't like what you had to say".
Ditto
I hate to break it to you but when you allow and/or encourage this type of behavior you effectively silence one side of the argument
Read my previous posts on here, kindly. Don't put words in my mouth. KK?
...and the utter garbage that is the latest balance patch makes it to testing there is nothing keeping it in check before it goes live.
So, here I repeat what I wrote before.
1) Relic decides the direction of the patch; and
2) the Balance team (if I understand them correctly) has to stay within 'scope'
Your judgment as to whether that it is successful is purely subjective. I am not making a judgment on your conclusion. But there is no need at all to personalise this. A balance team consists of those lead balancers who communicate with Relic, and then their testers.
The moderation team SEVERELY impacted this game in a negative way by invis'ing criticism simply because you all hold the members of the balance team in high regard and didn't want people criticizing their work.
I want to see your screenshots, please.
As I stated previously in this thread, we do try to protect our creators from rowdy, ill-informed comment (of which there is plenty). if we did not, you would have little to no creators.
The Moderators are not here to 'hold the balance team in high regard' - since often, they will not know who comprises the testers in the balance team.
Let me repeat: there is nothing wrong in civilised critiques of a patch - you are dissembling, at best, if you think the Moderators are trying to prevent valid criticism. By that, I mean the Moderators are not going to allow sly, personal attacks which are more an attack on an individual, rather than the subject at hand