Debates, proposals, complaints, (dis)agreement with moderator's decisions

[Јas]

I must second Earl on the ostensible unfairness of this locking. It looks like a random cracking of the whip.

What exactly is the "heart of this sub-board"? There are, as Earl cites, plenty of survivors that have little or nothing to do with "politics, economy and geography".

The sub-heading for the board indicates it is for "All Survivor Game Threads". Asking Earl to take his survivor thread to the Off-Topic Board would therefore seem to be contrary to the implied purpose of the board as written, presumably, by Dave.

I'll add that I'm not particularly interested in Earl's proposed survivor, and don't have any particular intention of taking part. It just seems that this specific moderating action strikes as contrary to the very purpose of the board.

[Јas]

Of course, I'll also take into account the fact that Jas, Xahar, Lewis, Al have expressed ideas or complaints. But, as I've said, except for Lewis, they aren't regular voters and so, I don't want to change rules only because of "outsiders".

I've already expressed my views, but just on the outsiders point: I usually only participate in Survivors where I feel I know enough to make reasonable votes.  If my voice will carry more weight by randomly voting in other survivors, do let me know.