Tail wheel, thanks for taking the time to set down a detailed reply. I understand the points you're making and, in the limit, it's indeed a publisher's right to pursue nearly any policy they like. At the same time, if the feedback of readers is of any interest at all, there is a bit recorded here.
One point that does still puzzle me is the apparent difference between the UK and Australian threads. I can occasionally read posts describing the relative merits of the 3 flying schools at the Lower Spewing (or whatever) airfield, but not similar comparisons at Jandakot, Bankstown etc. Even half-intelligent readers of internet material, or newspaper or other print reviews, understand that all comments are to be calibrated against a range of possible self-interest factors. But providing they are fair comment, it's all grist for the mill. It is useful to have this sort of commentary in the public domain, if only to balance and complement the stereotypical, cloying "learning to fly" pulp served up by the aviation magazines.
It's always "reader beware" of course but, as one UK poster noted, he's a novice pilot but not a novice human. No reason in principle why fair comparative comment about the basics of the flying training business should not be available, if not on PPRune, then elsewhere.
Re-reading your post, I wondered if you're saying that such a thread would work, but not in the Aust/NZ area of PPrune. The reminder about material aimed at professional pilot's is well taken but of course that boundary is pushed in other directions on many, many occasions.