EEL123 wrote:Yes, there was an exchange of insults, but there wasn't anyone who seemed particularly perturbed by that. You shouldn't start awarding damages until someone sues.
EEL123 wrote:The fact that everybody was perfectly content to continue the discussion and nobody complained (except, of course, the hyper-active moderation team), it appears that people did believe that the thread was not beyond saving and still had potential for "sensible discussion". Secondly, the idea that moderation should intervene even nobody is complaining about hurt feelings is simply ridiculous. An insult is an attack against an individual, not some general attack against Particracy, so unless that individual complains, moderation has no grounds to get involved. It seems that moderation, as if in compensation for their unsatisfactorily slow (no offence) responses in the past, is now engaging in a spate of hyper-activity. There is no point to it.
EEL123 wrote:You may think that it was all a pointless charade, but evidently the participants did not. Unless there was really strong reason to shut it down (i.e. someone running to moderation in tears), it should have been left open. Frankly, whether you think, or I think, it was worthwhile or could have been worthwhile is irrelevant; otherwise, you'd shut down half the threads in the forum (if you'll permit a conservative estimate).
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 53 guests