MN have now refined the reaction to deletion of posts rather than threads.
But confusion reigns about the nature of the posts that were deleted.
Disclaimer: The following question is theoretical and bears no relation to any living individual and no animals were harmed in the making of this post.
On MN I see many many threads discussing many schools and people asking for feedback on impressions from Open Days and for opinions from current parents. I have seen detailed critique - critical and complimentary - of the Heads' (not named, just called 'the head') speeches. They are part of the normal way parents talk to each other about schools. Is it libellous to pass on your impression of an event which is publicly available and aimed at a public audience? If not, how on earth do we ever have film and theatre reviews of actors, for example? Is it libellous to allege, for example, that in my opinion 'Claire Danes' use of the widened eye in Homeland is becoming ludicrous, does she have no other expresssion?'.
Is it libellous to say 'my child had this experience at this, shall we say, swimming club, and it wasn't for us so we have moved to another one'?
Is it libellous to say 'I was unhappy working at Royal Bank of Spotland because of the pressure, but now at Republican Piggy Bank I feel valued'? (Although I can see that there could be contractual issues re talking about your employer - bit those are different from libel).
If someone's opinion can be libellous shouldn't complimentary comments be deleted too?
FWIW, I don't think rumour, innuendo and non-evidenced gossip is acceptable and we have Newsnight as chief witness on that one.