In reply to Justin Tadlock.

I agree very much. "Censor" in ancient Rome was a public office, held by a respected elder who was elected once every 5 years to do a "cleaning up" of the membership of the governing body. The "censor" was supposed to be fair-minded, ideally, but strict. He didn't hold office for more than 18 months. He also personally contributed money and guidance to the building of public works projects, like aqueducts and roads. Not that we have to use the term that way, but it does seem to get at the spirit of the idea to say that "censors" should be public servants, fair-minded moderators of public discussion. In an ideal world.