being "thin skinned" was never the issue for those who left...it was the threat of being permanently banned when OTHER members were too thin skinned or wimpy to fend for themselves without the protection of the moderators or admin.

look, I "Get it"...Paul's house, Paul's rules.

and that's that.

but the forum has suffered because of the whiny complainers who couldn't stand a different viewpoint, strongly expressed.

in short, the ones who left (and/or stopped posting) tired of typing out long replies on an active thread, only to have the whole thread deleted...most times, without a reason given.

I think most of the time it is pretty clear why a thread goes poof. First, can you really expect a mod to spend an hour deleting out 15 individual posts as opposed to just axing the entire thread?

I'm gonna use BC's post as an example... it apparently was recently deleted... the one about oil prices and the market. His initial post mentioned that the DOW and S&P were down for the year.... that oil was up, and that it looked like the market could be in for rocky day on Monday... now... all of that was true... DOW and S&P ARE down year to date, oil WAS up, and Sunday night futures indicated Monday COULD be a rocky day in the markets. He concluded his initial post by asking for the opinion of the man on here that knows more about the markets than probably anyone else.

So, what exactly was wrong with any of that?

But what followed was several pages of replies calling BC a troll and saying he had TDS....as well as some bashing the President...... interspersed with a few people actually replying with informative, well thought out replies. You don't have to like what a person says or even like the person, but can we really not reply with cognizant, constructive replies without resorting to name calling and personal attacks?

Now, in order to salvage that post.... someone would have had to go through and delete the dozen or so posts bashing people in order to salvage half a dozen good posts. Who has time for all that?

Can we have moderator elections? Have a primary and then elections just like for politicians? Candidates can promise to limit deletions or whatever they want to lie ab........I mean do?
It could be just like the real world!!

LOL at this point do ya think anyone would even wanna run?

Oh Yea they would. Imagine being able to limit or delete what others say!

I think most of the time it is pretty clear why a thread goes poof. First, can you really expect a mod to spend an hour deleting out 15 individual posts as opposed to just axing the entire thread?

I'm gonna use BC's post as an example... it apparently was recently deleted... the one about oil prices and the market. His initial post mentioned that the DOW and S&P were down for the year.... that oil was up, and that it looked like the market could be in for rocky day on Monday... now... all of that was true... DOW and S&P ARE down year to date, oil WAS up, and Sunday night futures indicated Monday COULD be a rocky day in the markets. He concluded his initial post by asking for the opinion of the man on here that knows more about the markets than probably anyone else.

So, what exactly was wrong with any of that?

But what followed was several pages of replies calling BC a troll and saying he had TDS....as well as some bashing the President...... interspersed with a few people actually replying with informative, well thought out replies. You don't have to like what a person says or even like the person, but can we really not reply with cognizant, constructive replies without resorting to name calling and personal attacks?

Now, in order to salvage that post.... someone would have had to go through and delete the dozen or so posts bashing people in order to salvage half a dozen good posts. Who has time for all that?

I think most of the time it is pretty clear why a thread goes poof.

LOL at this point do ya think anyone would even wanna run?

I think most of the time it is pretty clear why a thread goes poof. First, can you really expect a mod to spend an hour deleting out 15 individual posts as opposed to just axing the entire thread?

I'm gonna use BC's post as an example... it apparently was recently deleted... the one about oil prices and the market. His initial post mentioned that the DOW and S&P were down for the year.... that oil was up, and that it looked like the market could be in for rocky day on Monday... now... all of that was true... DOW and S&P ARE down year to date, oil WAS up, and Sunday night futures indicated Monday COULD be a rocky day in the markets. He concluded his initial post by asking for the opinion of the man on here that knows more about the markets than probably anyone else.

So, what exactly was wrong with any of that?

But what followed was several pages of replies calling BC a troll and saying he had TDS....as well as some bashing the President...... interspersed with a few people actually replying with informative, well thought out replies. You don't have to like what a person says or even like the person, but can we really not reply with cognizant, constructive replies without resorting to name calling and personal attacks?

Now, in order to salvage that post.... someone would have had to go through and delete the dozen or so posts bashing people in order to salvage half a dozen good posts. Who has time for all that?

As for the thread about the stock market--most of the people who posted are not even in the market. I don't think White17 ever had a chance to weight in (I agree, he is the most knowledgeable on TMan).

He hasn't logged in in 3 days. Or posted since he was attacked by... well..... I guess I shouldn't use names either. I sincerely hope someday we'll get to see more of his financial knowledge posted on here again.