Former Premier Ewart Brown has declined an offer to have his account on an online blog reactivated.Dr Brown signed up to the blog Bermuda is Another World last week but was kicked off days later after an exchange with critic Kevin Comeau.But the site administrators readmitted Dr Brown after the matter was reported by the Bermuda Sun, and a number of members including commentator Jonathan Starling as well as Mr Comeau himself protested the move.In an e-mail to this newspaper and the Bermuda Sun, the site administrator who prefers to remain anonymous, explained that he had received “numerous” messages of concern over his decision to admit Dr Brown to the forum and asking for the decision to be reversed.He said his unilateral decision to admit him had “upset a number” of the forum’s members.“I then informed Dr Brown that in light of this turn of events, I would be closing his account,” the statement continued.But, the email continued, the rules provide the right of appeal should a poster feel they have been unfairly warned or banned with the moderators voting on the matter.“Such a vote has now taken place at BIAW on my decision to close Dr Brown’s account, and the Moderators have ruled that Dr Brown’s account should be reinstated. This has now been done.“That decision is final, but I should point out that infractions against the rules of the forum can lead any member to disciplinary action in the future. This is the normal manner in which items such as this are handled. Dr Brown is now free to post once again.”The site administrator e-mailed an apology to Dr Brown “for the confusion” and informed him that a “binding” vote by the moderators had overturned the decision to deactivate his account.Dr Brown declined, saying: “If the future allows any exchange of views between me and the BIAW posters, it will have to be without the cloud of one-sided anonymity. Bermuda deserves nothing less.”Contacted by The Royal Gazette for clarification, the site administrator indicated that Dr Brown did nothing to warrant the closure of his account, and had not appealed to have it reinstated.“Members had already begun to post that Dr Brown should be reinstated shortly after it was announced that his account had been closed. The moderators of the forum are fully aware of the rules of the forum and do not necessarily have to wait for an appeal to be lodged before investigating.”He added that the appeal process was launched by the moderators and was “well underway” before the Bermuda Sun article appeared.But he would not say what the forum members had been concerned about when Dr Brown was admitted to the forum.“What members’ concerns were is inconsequential, they were of such a nature as to lead me to believe that I had erred in allowing him to register. I subsequently reversed my decision. That decision had nothing to do with anything Dr. Brown said or did,” the administrator said.But he added that BIAW is a private website and its owners are free to choose who they admit as members.Jonathan Starling who has decided not to participate in the forum for the foreseeable future, told the forum yesterday that the fact that Dr Brown can be a “polarising” figure was no reason to deny him “the right to engage and defend himself against those who have attacked him mercilessly for years, largely behind the security of false names.”He added that reversing the decision not to admit Dr Brown “compounds the farcical nature of it all”.He blogged: “If Dr Brown’s presence here encourages more traditional PLP voices (and others) to post here, and create a more balanced forum, then you bet I’ll be here.”But he told this newspaper that Dr Brown now has “every right to regard that forum with a degree of contempt.”Asked whether he considered the forum has any value, Mr Starling said: “If it has a value today, it is to provide a window into the psyche of conservative White male Bermuda.“That’s not without its merit. They are part of Bermuda, it is important to be aware of their views.”The matter has highlighted concerns about anonymous speech. In March, parliament led by Opposition MP Rolfe Commissiong excoriated the then editor of this newspaper for publishing an anonymous letter to the Editor which was deemed offensive to black people.The motion to adjourn debate saw bipartisan support for exploring legislation against attacks behind pseudonyms on blogs, talk radio and in newspapers.Due to the continued serial abuse by a small minority of commentators, The Royal Gazette has taken the decision to not allow any comments on this story. This is in large part due to legal ramifications which have arisen in the past.