posted on July 15, 2001 12:36:44 PM
...the thread that was locked was not meant to instigate argument, but rather conversation.
I'm sorry if you took it otherwise. It just seems unreasonable to me that someone can get a thread closed down simply because *they* object to either the topic or the vocabulary used.
That instead of using rational debate to prove one's point and to avoid any conversation altogether a person need only spout filth or have a tantrum and a thread will be closed down altogether.
So I guess that if *any* one person objects to any word, term, or subject it is perfectly OK to make sure that no one else can discuss it.
Personally, I could see warning the person using those tactics, or deleting their posts, but to close down an entire thread because *one* person was causing a ruckus?
I know, I know, take it to email if I question a moderation...
posted on July 15, 2001 12:43:02 PM
I have seen cases were an interesting thread was locked because of a ruckus. I think there should be a surgical process to remove the ruckie or ruckies and let the thread live.
