If kitty, RP and Smurf want to debate this, it would be so great if they could at least stick with the exact topic that they are claiming that they want to debate instead of flying into hyperbole world. The sky is not falling guys.
I learned a long time ago that it wasn't worth my time to argue with you, Dorothy. kitty and RP clearly gets it. You don't.
A board is useful when there is a healthy exchange of ideas, perceptions & debate on issues. It can, and usually does, get contentious on issues that are controversial, i.e. Scientology. If I were a mod, I would monitor the comments to insure they don't violate the guidelines & TOS set down by Andreas for OCMB. If there is no violation, I would step back and watch the "catfight". It is not my role to police people's comments based on what I consider to be appropriate. There are 1-2 mods on OCMB that have proven they cannot be objective & should not be mods. They should create their own personal blogs, whereby, they would have the complete freedom to edit & delete comments whenever they like, just as Marty does.
What has happened on OCMB is no different than what has happened with the LAPD's relationship with Scientology, as it pertains to critics who protest. When there is a special permit granted to the cult, it is the LAPD's role to enforce the rules & guidelines of the permit, not to invoke their own discretion & beliefs on where critics can protest outside the realm of the permit. This is a battle that Doug Owens & others have been fighting for years.
Don Carlo spoke of "complaints". People will complain about anything & everything that doesn't meet their definition of acceptability. Let them complain until they're blue in the face. It is not the mod's role to entertain complaints that don't involve OCMB rules.
I recently received a warning from the "YouTube Team" that a couple of my videos on protests by the Westboro Baptist Church could be deleted due to incendiary comments, i.e. sexually lewd, death threats, or calling for the murder of Shirley Phelps & her family, being made on my channel. Shirley Phelps-Roper & her husband had had filed a written complaint. Since I did not make these comments myself, and they were made by others who had seen my videos & were reacting to them, I contacted an attorney at the EFF. https://www.eff.org/
The attorney I spoke with said it would be totally irresponsible of me to edit or delete people's comments because that violates their free speech. Making angry comments and using profanity is "protected free speech" under the U.S. Constitution. I was told to post a disclaimer on my YouTube channel, which I posted yesterday.
"I have been notified by YouTube that my videos can be deleted due to lewd & incendiary comments, i.e., death threats, implied threats, to individuals in my videos. Yes, folks, these twits have filed complaints to YouTube. If you continue to post them, they will be deleted and you will be blocked. Sorry, I don't want my videos deleted because of twits who think that the First Amendment only applies to them."