Your editorial calls out what you claim is "a tight knit inner circle of board members and their close friends."

Your accusations are essentially that this "inner circle" group uses a barrage of "hateful Facebook posts" to mock, discredit, and shut down anyone who threatens the status quo.

To quote your editorial: "And the message is crystal clear: Speak out and we'll come for you. Get involved and we'll dig up dirt or create it. Try to run for office and we'll make sure you regret it."

You obviously know the individuals you accuse in your editorial, but not one individual or "hateful Facebook posts" location is referenced.

Even if your general concerns have some basis in fact, the editorial is a terrible piece of journalism as it is nothing but innuendo.

Such innuendo broad-brush paints the entire board and friends of board members as participants in some "HOA Clique" out to attack certain association members.

Not good.

*************

From the Internet:

Fueling misinformation:
Innuendo, which involves implying something without explicitly stating it, can be easily misinterpreted or used to spread false information. Studies have shown that even subtle hints and implied connections can lead people to believe conspiracy theories.

Lack of transparency:
Using innuendo can be seen as a way to avoid being transparent about the truth and instead manipulate the audience's perception. It can also be seen as a way to avoid charges of defamation.

Ethical concerns:
Innuendo can be seen as unethical because it can be used to deceive or manipulate the audience. It can also be seen as a form of "rush to judgment," jumping to conclusions without complete or accurate information.

Impact on credibility:
When journalists use innuendo, it can erode their credibility and the credibility of the news organization. It can also be seen as a sign of poor journalism.