Deej, Did it really take a Forbes.com article to elicit a response that contained more than "Go find a clan, f*ggots"? If these accusations of censorship are unfounded, then can you explain why the forum algorithms are removing posts asking for matchmaking? And can you explain why the community focus articles since at least March have been a backhanded slap to those of us who don't have time for manual match-making in the form of LFG sites and clans? Look, I understand that you're just a liason, and that your masters don't always loosen your leash. I work in the auto industry, acting as a liason between my company (the supplier) and my customer (the automaker). Sometimes I have to creatively work around a subject if I'm not allowed to provide an answer. However, if my customer pushes, I put on my big-boy pants, look at my supplier, and say "They won't take that answer. They need a good one, which means we'll need to eat crow on this." And you know what? They do the professional thing, and give me the authority to tell my customer, "Nope, you're right. We done goofed, and here's all that we're doing to try and fix it." All you've shown us, through this whole thing, is that it takes an outside publication to bring about any sort of actual response. At this point though, I don't trust it. And I doubt many of my fellow Guardians do either. We've been insulted every step of the way by a company that is too lazy, and just wants us to play the game their way. Do you and your masters forget what happened with Halo 2? The "Zombies" game mode that was made up by [i]players[/i] and was so well-liked that it ended up as a legitimate game mode in Halo 3? That's what happens when you let players play the way [i]they[/i] want, not the way [i]Bungie[/i] wants. Assuming we do believe you, is there any chance you could ask the supplier when we might see some optional match-making? Is there any chance you could, for once, give us a straight answer?