A compromise, perhaps?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

...but Inks did what he did in good faith using his best judgment.

that's why I have explicitly stated that I neither blame Inks nor request he be removed from the Mod ranks.  The problem is NOT the Mods, rather it is the attitude that this forum has a "problem" that needs to be "fixed".

I don't think I ever participated in calling someone an HP, it's not my style, but that doesn't mean I think the threads should be banned.  This forum is quickly becoming P.C. Pussyville

WHAT PROBLEM, EXACTLY, ARE WE TRYING TO SOLVE?!

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Turning down the dial down on humiliating, demeaning, and attacking posters on a personal level.  

Torie, since you are not a Mod, allow me to treat you as if you were a Mod so that I can display my true feelings without those feelings actually being directed at the Mods (again, this is not directly at you):

if the target of such "insults" is not offended, why is it a problem?  why do you feel the need for a system to interject itself into a debate when both sides aren't having a problem with the level of discourse?

I understand and agree with banning profanity and porn to keep the site from being filtered, but YOUR attempt to ban perceived insults of others when the other hasn't voice an objection, is obviously only going to cause a problem for YOU.  You learn that in school growing up – stick your noise into a heated discussion when you’re not welcomed to do so is only going to cause problems for YOU, so stay out.

Having an animated discussion is just the way some people work out problems between themselves – and on this forum it’s the chosen method for many on both sides.  And just because the argument seems heated, it does NOT mean there is any real animosity between the warring factions.  But, if YOU butt in and interrupt the discourse, then you’re going to create a problem where there was no real problem to being with.

So, again I ask:  Why is there this need to butt into our conversations when neither side is having a problem with the tone of the conversation?  Stop being an ass by antagonizing us with your intrusions!

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

i think a perfect example are the debates between Dibble and me...he trolls almost every thread I create on the Religion Board, and I respond by elbowing him in the chest.  But neither one of us have a problem with it, because we are still able to get our point across and move the debate along.

So, even though he and I play rough and trash talk, we still cover a lot of logical ground.  

---

Another example -

I grew up with 3 older brothers, and BY FAR the biggest part of the fun of playing games together was the "rolling commentary" in-between plays.  We were not only the players, but we were the color commentators.  And everyone enjoyed the commentary, regardless how lopsided the score and regardless of what side of the score you were on.

But the way this forum is being run, color commentary is considered “trolling”

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I think it is within the terms of use for me to express my opinion (even if as you imply, my opinion is shared by no one else), just as you express yours. And sometimes one's opinion offends others. That is just part of life. And here we have different opinions about the content of the forum - at least at the margins.

But, if you're not a party in the conversation, why do you care that a conversation between two other posters involves elbowing? 

Would you go to the gym and interrupt a game from the sidelines and complain to the teams that they are playing too "rough" when neither side was complaining?  If you did so, you'd wake up in a roadside ditch.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

A mod would be foolish to ignore the relationship between two posters and how they interact with one another. If neither is offended by their sharp elbowed way of interacting with one another, and they actually enjoy it, then of course I would take a laissez faire attitude myself.

which is why I disagree with the Deluge and HP treads being shutdown, even though I don’t think I ever voted HP.  I didn’t see anyone complaining, even when they were the target.  And trust me, I’ve received probably more HP votes than any poster in the history of this forum.

Shutting those down amounted to needless interjection.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

the main reason I shut it down is that at its core, it was contrary to the purpose of the forum.

what exactly is the ”purpose” of this forum?  Discussing politics?  If so, then the FC and OT boards are clearly “contrary to the purpose of this forum”.  But these boards were created for the sole purpose of giving us a sandbox apart from simply discussing politics.

---

I was just curious if the forum community would be willing to sacrifice commenting to get it back.  Apparently they're not – they want all or nothing.

Inks, you have a serious attitude problem.  And not just you, but many of the Mods. This forum exists for the entertainment of its posters.  Period.  As a moderator, you’re supposed to be serving the interest of the posters to the extent it does not violate Leip’s interest.

And I’m not going to be convinced Dave has become this anal retentive, unless I hear it from him.