the problem is that your link is just more supposition, worth no more or no less than anyone else's opinion of why the forum took the action it did. The author even admits to as much. And then the even bigger stretch is that they relented and allowed the posts afterward --after the author specifically said they routinely delete posts not directly support-related. Inconsistency? Absolutely. No getting around it. But the author gives them a supposition-based pass there, too. He's got it all worked out, he does.
There are no facts there. Just his guesses as to why the actions occurred, giving Apple the benefit of the doubt at every turn, of course. So, I don't give his "nothing to see here" blog any more credence than Gizmodo's postings. If making claims in a calm manner now equals "fact", we're in trouble. Could he be right? Sure. But "could" doesn't necessarily equal "is".
The real problem isn't the sensationalist tech-press, as it were. It's the silence from the company that could easily tamp down such by directly admitting the flaws in the antenna design and offer a free remedy. Even Consumer Reports is almost aching for them to do just that so they can recommend the phone for all of its obvious compelling features.
And blaming "the bars" is just ridiculous. Tell people you're working up a fix in the way of some non-conductive band or cover and send it out. Rework phones that aren't already in production, if need be, and be done with it. People still want this phone. But they need it to work in its core mission. And I'd suspect (just guessing, lol) that most people would like a company to be forthcoming about issues like this.