hutcheson - 12:07 am on Aug 30, 2006 (gmt 0)

Your description is ambiguous--and of course some details can't be given in this forum. Which is perhaps a relevant example: webmasterworld (like every other site) has rules based on its owner's best judgment, which he's never required to justify to anyone. If a site is useful to you, and you can put up with the owner's rules, use it: otherwise, there are other sites.

There are three possibilities that might be described with those words: (1) historically, there was a justified requirement, which may no longer be operative, (2) there is a currently justified requirement, (3) it's unjustifiable fly-by-night webmaster abuse, soon to be cleaned up by honest editors. Without details, it's impossible to tell which case you're referring to.