That's right. I deleted the thread using the general guidelines. When a thread starts out as an attack, there is not much chance of it being civil. Joe is but one of us, and he is the senior admin person. His if generally the last word, but there are several of us that serve this function. There was another thread I asked Joe to review. I felt like it should be closed, but I had participated in it. Hence I felt as though someone else should make the decision. Mudelf

What message is it giving and is it really such a great idea for the forum, to have unknown numbers of volunteers who impose judgement on the worth of the contributions of others - but for some reason choose to remain intentionally anonymous?

If we have to have all these volunteer censors (and I am more and more convinced that we do not) - would it really be such a bad idea to only have volunteers who were prepared to be known and be accountable?

I disagree totally with Joe over censorship on the forum but at least he has the courage to stand by his actions and be known. There are other volunteers who also do not feel they need to be anonymous.