This perhaps is a question for Henry DeMoor, but I would assume there are others who might like to give an opinion.
Prior to the Church Order revision in '65, there was an article that required "mutual censure" at Classis meetings- Art. 43: At the close of the Classical, and other major assemblies, censure shall be exercised over those, who in the meeting have done something worthy of punishment, or who have scorned the admonition of the minor assemblies.
VanDellen and Monsma explain in their commentary this censure is done by the assembly and not the president or consistories as two other articles require. In addition, the intent was to promote good order and unity at the end of the meeting- which even today is a cherished desire. VanDellen and Monsma also state that we as a church may outgrow the need for this article- perhaps, but human nature being as it is...perhaps not.
The purpose was to bring to closure perhaps hurtful or harmful actions that happened at the Classis. While the current Church Order does not require this, perhaps Classis themselves could initiate a process to complete the original intent.
My question is, of course if it can be answered, why was that particular Article eliminated in the revision?