I was at first shocked by Razzle’s arguments and fully agreeing with editorial comments. But soon came an aftertaste: things weren’t black or white. 
 First, because at the end, I wouldn’t like too someone is enforced to change such a name (or any name) even if I hate it. Words must be contested with words, ideas with ideas, theories with theories. Threat or brutal force, especially in this case, is adopting the first step toward what we may hate in such a name. Yes, I understood the point wasn’t really about freedom of words or names, but the contradiction with the rules or opposite attitude when it’s about other words or names. And Razzle carefully avoided this point.
 Second, because Razzle, at least, dared to stand for his reasons and convictions as PKs’ boss in public.  Quite remarkable in a Universe under the Law of Silence. Where any serious question is answered by “mail at…”, when you aren’t ejected for “harassment”. Where no serious concern is discussed in public, and sometimes not even by mail unless you phone. Where the priority in communication is to implement a whisper feature, what a symbol!  At least, I think this should have been pointed out.

 But the thing is we are so much starving for consideration (as a community) that we rush on any little which is said, and argue about points we know the main default is they never been discussed. To the point we miss the meaning of some silence.
 Some COF representative was there. At least concerned because all this is about COF rules. Even more when it’s someone responsible for GKs (“my GKs” to quote) facing the same questions.  One could think the silence of this person could be a tactful attitude.  PKs are subcontractors applying COF policy. It’s clever to let them explain their point without patronising them in public, like if they weren’t responsible enough to stand for the mission they accepted. 

 Alas, silence is like virginity. Broken even once, and it’s no more silence with its innocence and reserve. And when this COF representative feels the urgent need to warn someone calling  “Adolf Hitler” a “sad fucker”, suddenly the rest of the silence speaks up.
 Yes, in the scale of shame, calling “sad fucker” someone waving about the symbol of Nazism is far ahead than this symbol. Awful enough to the point to interfere when Razzle was the one supposed to make this warning. But when it’s about meaningless rhetorical considerations on “Adolf Hitler”… silence.

 This is where we are. No matter the rust if it’s covered with a nice fresh paint. No matter what message or attitude we may expect from someone calling himself “Adolf Hitler”. The important thing is, this is just a name if we don’t look at what it means and started to be said by this jerk.  While calling such an idiot “sad fucker” is an awful paint, no matter we understand the noble sentiments of disgust behind them. The paint is bad, change it, no matter what’s under it

 But is all about having just wrong judgement methods for what we aim at? Do we agree on the rust under the paint? Nothing is sure.
 When a GK says, addressing his colleagues  “Just a note on all this Adolph Hitler crap ..I may not like his name.....but i will defend his right to use it ........”, one may think this is an individual opinion. But when no other GK answers, even saying some “it depends..” if not “I disagree”, again silence says long.

 And when some passers-by disappear in silence in the street and you don’t see them again, when a good part of the crowd feel uncomfortable enough so to look away or say “it’s a shame” low enough so not to be heard, when hostages is a common practice, when we have censorship (in the strict sense), when independent neighbouring places of discussion should bow to principles dictated by the Empire in a kind of “Anschluss” theory etc… well… the after-aftertaste is strange.

 Finally, Razzle is totally right. Calling yourself “Adolf Hitler” isn’t the point, more is how you behave. As to consider rules and guidelines… well, we need a good joke from time to time, don’t we? ?

P.S.: Sorry GK, but you were wrong. “Adolf” is the right spelling in German. Maybe in other countries…