Monetans Hiding Again?

.

Somebody told me the other day that the Moneta-L archives, which had been opened to public view, were closed. Frankly, I did not believe them since no such announcement had been made on the list (and one was made earlier about the decision to open them). Also all posts carry the footer:

List users are reminded that they must sign their name to all posts. All posts on MONETA-L are the responsibility of the poster. MONETA-L has an open archive policy, which means that all posts are available to the public and may be archived on search engines. Think before you write. The opinions expressed on this list are not necessarily those of the list moderators.

But just now somebody has confirmed independently, the archives are no longer visible to non-members. They also surmised that I would:

no doubt be interested in this, especially, I think, because its closure coincides with the lengthy discussion challenging the ACCG's role in the issues and the unmeasured responses from the dealers (esp. Sayles, Welsh, and De La Fe).

A question therefore to Moneta-L moderators, have the list archives been been closed deliberately, and is it just a coincidence that this occurred at the moment the measures taken by the ACCG to support imports of illegally exported coins were being openly discussed by collectors who disagreed with these tactics? If so, what precisely is this intended to hide? That some collectors have different opinions from others? That not all collectors follow the Party line of the ACCG "Internationalists"? Is the closure temporary, or have you decided to hide coin-based discussions from the public permanently? If the subject of the list was collecting Codd bottles, Staffordshire pottery or Toby Jugs, would it have a closed archive, and for what reason therefore does the ethical collecting of coins require one?

A question to the ACCG, if public access to the Moneta-L archives was deliberately blocked, was this at the request of the ACCG? What is the ACCG position on the subject of the free flow of information about differing opinions in the collecting community and on the politics of collecting? Does the ACCG welcome a free and frank exchange of views from collectors such as Reid Goldsborough and Chris W., or would they rather that such views were silenced?

In whose interest is the censoring of information on the artefact trade and collecting so the general public (the real major stakehholders in the heritage) cannot see how harmless, beneficial and rewarding a hobby ancient coin collecting is? What have the collectors of ancient coins, who are so vociferous in demanding 'transparency' in other contexts, got to hide?

Vignette: Sweeping the dirt under the carpet (Banksy in Camden)