Website Issues: User Expected Functionality

At the advice of my brother, I created a profile on JDate. I found that the site limits the users' choices as far as content. For example, I tried to add a picture of my motorcycle, which was rejected because I was not in the picture. I also tried to add a link to my website so other users could contact me without having to sign up for a JD account. In the About Me section of the main page, I tried to make the following entry:

Life (bret) has (leduc) been (dot) really (com) good for me so far. I just learned how to grab my fingers behind my back. I can do a cartwheel. Wanna go for a ride on my bicycle built for two? JD rejected a picture of my motorcycle, so you will never find me on here.

The darlings at JD modified the paragraph to this:

I just learned how to grab my fingers behind my back. I can do a cartwheel. Wanna go for a ride on my bicycle built for two?

This is wholly unacceptable from a user standpoint. I will never recommend this site to anyone. If asked about the site, I will claim the site offers a whole string of malware including Klez, Mydoom and Sasser.
But as a computer science professional, I need to look at this debacle and say, "Why would I want to make a site that held people hostage?" How can it be that a website is so "good" that they people still use it, even as they are being surpressed? Why would someone put up with artificial limitations? I think this is really the key to understanding a related subject: economics.
We the people of any given trade nation put up with the limitations of money such as disparity and uncertain value. We are conditioned from birth to think of money and products in certain ways so as to promote the continuation of the buying and selling process. This process, however, seems to be collapsing as shown by the recent fall of major financial institutions such as Bear Stearns, AIG, Washington Mutual, etc.
It must be, said I, that others are also discovering the question that has been masked for so long, "What is anything worth?" This leads to a deeper discovery, "What questions am I not asking regarding the value of some thing?" I think money is a game created by the government, but I do not yet have the words to articulate this in a way that does not come across as a conspiracy theory.
Positively, I do not think the money game is unwinnable. I think that if you introduce the concept of win and lose into the game of money, then you will find winners and losers (such as Bill Gates vs. any peasant in Zimbabwe). But the game itself is harmless and fair.
I would extend an invitation to Econ majors to comment on this, and you may, but I am only casually interested in the answer. My current real concern is finishing an 8-page essay that is due tonight.
The true value of something is the amount of life you give to it.