I appreciate your response.

If I am to understand correctly, it was removed because it was effectively off-topic, which somehow makes this post go from grey area but acceptable into the black-area realm? However, I must disagree; the post is only off-topic because the original one it was replying to was removed. The original post was on-topic, although coarse. The reply was not coarse.

To what extent are you planning to shield the user base from words that fifth-graders know? The word was the only thing suggestive in my post. It was a sarcastic comment that I "appreciated' Michael's discussion of something. There was no implication of obscene content beyond the word itself.

There needs to be a standard. Is coarse content not allowed if you cannot tell from the topic? Is it still not allowed under those circumstances? I appreciate the work you volunteer into this, but if you are going to expect the user base to conform to constricting rules, you need to clearly and absolutely define under which circumstances these are allowed. Otherwise, it might be advisable to err on the side of leniency.

Although I appreciate that a warning wasn't given, I don't think that any reasonable way of seeing this would result in a warning. Certainly, if a warning could even be considered, the rules would need to be extremely clear.