Nothing so formal or dramatic happened. It was flagged as a terms violation, as content on GAF is on a semi-regular basis. I evaluated this case as something that would best be changed to avoid the association with certain unsavory elements (which CW has since taken on, even though the original GAF CW thread predates that), since it doesn't actually have such affiliations. I can choose to do nothing, but I have to be willing to defend that decision at some point in the future too, if it comes to that. In this instance it's better for all involved to make some minor adjustments, keep the thread intact, and have a stronger leg to stand on when the site needs to be defended.
These decisions are made every day to keep the site running smoothly and above board, just like the decisions about DMCA requests and C&D requests. It's not a "slippery slope;" it's what I've been doing since the formation of GAF.
Re: hari, there's a right way and a wrong way to go about discussing site matters. He chose the wrong way: jumping to conclusions, insults, sensationalized declaratives, aggressive escalation. There's only one way that ends.
Hope that helps clarify.