Hi Peter. Sorry for the delay in responding.
The moderation note on your comment says:
[ MOD: Kindly stay on-topic for the latest subject. You are welcome to repost this on an earlier subject. ]
I’m not the moderator who intervened on this occasion, and may have worded the advice slightly differently, but I agree with its rationale. Your comment was not directly related to the thread topic: i.e. the unwarranted detention of Julian Assange. It was in effect an advertisement for a public talk by Tony Blair, concerning political populism rather than press freedom or abuse of legal process. It therefore constitutes a sharp tangent, and the segue “People may like the opportunity to discuss these matters with Tony Blair” is too tenuous and generic to link it directly with the ongoing discussion. It therefore fails the “Relevance” criterion as published in Craig’s moderation rules for commenters:
Attempts to keep people on topic are hopeless, but do try.
I appreciate the rule could be phrased better, but in this case it could be reasonably argued that you didn’t try hard enough to stay on topic. Craig recently requested that the rule be enforced more strictly in order to keep the latest threads on topic and avoid non-sequiturs or digressions into other news stories, perennial controversies, or regular preoccupations. We have been issuing inline reminders of the Relevance rule to all commenters who wander off topic on the latest thread, particularly when the comment starts with “In other news …” or “Meanwhile …”. Off-topic comments can still be posted on earlier threads, or on this discussion forum (which is provided for precisely that purpose).
Your thoughts and responses on the latest topics are very welcome, provided they concern the thread topic or develop the ongoing discussions in a logical way. You can raise other matters on the appropriate pages.
I hope that answers your question satisfactorily (even if you may not agree with the decision in this instance).