Eugene - thanks for your reply. I have to tell you that I think your 3 judge panel has it all wrong. If you were to establish this thread along lines that bear any semblance of democratic principles, then perhaps you would:
1. Be very clear on what guidelines you use to ban people from the thread (William's description in the initial post is very vague)
2. When you ban someone from the thread, you clearly state the reason why.
3. You implement a system of warnings (for example, you give two warnings before kicking someone off the thread).
4. You reveal the names of your judges - and you publish their votes when a vote is taken to kick someone off the thread - and you even, perhaps, allow an appeal.
Without the above, you guys come off like the gestapo that is taking people out in the night - because you don't like what they say or the way they say it. This is America, guys.
You may certainly wish to retain tight control over the discussion on this thread - but with the example you've set with Kis's ouster, that's all your going to get - a tightly controlled discussion (which in my book, doesn't amount to much). And actions such as that taken yesterday are certainly not going to help in promoting this thread (but perhaps you have no interest in this).
I would recommend that you either adopt a policy of openness (by implementing the suggestions above) or that you stop the practice of banning of posters altogether. Unless you do either of these, I certainly won't actively post my opinions to this thread (but of course, perhaps, you're not interested in them).
Thanks,
-Eric |
