Just to clarify (again)  during the course of the SC's work, we get all sorts of requests and demands for clarification, some written in specific ways, others more loosely ended; some are probably things that the SC doesn't care to address, others are possibly badly worded, and others have excellent intentions, but the SC may not have anything to do with it (ie. incorrect assumptions on what the SC should or should not clarify).
However, just because a request is 'strangely' worded (not all citizens have English as their primary language), deliberately or not, this doesn't mean that an issue should be ignored by the SC. In some cases, the strange request may indeed contain something worthwhile to discuss and analyse, although at first sight it might be dismissed.
So we don't judge requests for clarification if they're weirdly written; the worst that can happen is that their discussion is postponed because there is not enough information on a specific subject. This sadly happens quite often; 4-hour long meetings after a week of preparation might very often not be enough.
Finally, the right of any citizen to express themselves in whichever terms they like, in public or private (the sim is a Mature one!), as long as it's not intended to defame publicly a citizen or a clear case of hate speech, is guaranteed in the City. So, if one doesn't like "nationalistic euphemisms" and "doublespeak", that's fine; it's one's right to dislike how people write, and to publicly claim that one doesn't like a particular style. However, one's right to dislike "nationalistic euphemisms" is at the same level as the right of others to use their favourite writing style in their requests to the SC. Personally, I don't rewrite other people's requests to fit them to a specific "style".
I understand that for many it is frustrating that things take so much time, and that the SC is apparently "wasting" time on what seem to be unimportant issues. Actually, we strive to give a fair share of time to [i:3vhsk2sl]all[/i:3vhsk2sl] issues. An unimportant issue for a citizen might be a crucial one to the next citizen. Unless the procedures change (which they might  nothing is written on stone), the SC will try to give [i:3vhsk2sl]any[/i:3vhsk2sl] request a fair share of attention.
As to the constitutional prerogative to shut down a forum, opening or shutting down forums are forum moderation tasks, and official City forums are indeed the prerogative of the SC to moderate. Until that task is amended or changed by further legislation  always a prerogative of the RA!  it's the SC's sole duty to exercise forum moderation, something which should have been clear by now.