The OP was rapidly approaching a violation of Rule 15 - WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY.
The OP is not referring to 'A well regulated Militia', quite the opposite in fact. That is what Administrator is prohibiting. Discussions regarding 'A well regulated Militia' should be more than acceptable, in my view, but what is the point behind that. That subject is boring and, in Missouri anyway, already codified into law.
A citizen refusing to 'aid the civil power' when lawfully called can face criminal penalties.
Discussions regarding 'A well regulated Militia' will neither promote nor hinder our efforts to restore our individual right to keep and bear arms as the Founder's originally intended.
And instead of warning that that a new member was
approaching a possible rule violation, the Administrator said this.
This is outside the scope of OpenCarry.org. I would suggest that there are other forums where you would find a more receptive audience. We do not address militia issues here. We are focused on working within the system to insure such a need never arises.
John
You can try and spin it if you like. John told him we do not address militia issues here. He did not say we don't address "some" militia issues here, he made it clear he doesn't want any militia issues discussed here. It is this blanket prohibition of a topic directly connected to the 2nd Amendment that I am opposed to. John already has the power to edit or delete posts at his whim, that apparently isn't enough, he needs to stop discussion of the 2nd Amendment before it starts.
You will forgive me if I don't comment on the points you made concerning "well regulated", I do have an opinion, I just don't feel that I can voice them here. It would be against the Administrator's decry to not "address" militia issues here. True, he hasn't found the need to return and castigate us for our few violations of the (unwritten) rules(is he not a merciful King), but I don't feel it is proper to violate his edict. This is my point about why I am against this prohibition, it limits discussion of the various points of view and opinions of the 2nd Amendment, and I feel that is wrong. Hopefully some day John will allow full and open discussion of the 2nd Amendment, I can only hope his stance will "evolve" like the POTUS's did.
By the way, many of the terms, phrases and views used in the OP can be found daily in any number of other threads through out this forum, they just don't have the word "militia" attached. "Tyrannical Government" and "gun registration by the government" are topics I have seen posted here any number of times, and not a word is said by the powers that be, but add the word "militia" to them and suddenly you are violating some unwritten rule. Strange, one might almost say......hypocritical.