Jeri said

Regarding Shambles request to have this thread deleted in his opening post, this is like taking a shit in the middle of the floor expecting someone else to clean it up for you,<possibly taking glee in watching the work you've made them do. When they decide to leave it lying around so everyone can see what sort of a person<you are, you can't blame them.

Not a yet another double standard here Jeri - is it?

You think it is wrong to shit on the floor and expect someone to clean it up - but OK when an anonymous volunteer does clean it up - but decides to shit on the floor again themselves? Shit is shit - no matter who shits it.

I think we should be be clear that the most harmful thing here is to encourage the idea that thread tiles like this one - inviting personal judgements upon fellow posters are acceptable. This concern was something that I had seen Joe express recently - so expecting some consistancy - I was amazed that when Joe thought he had to rush to impose his personal judgement upon fellow poster's contributions - and given a choice of 3 thread titles - that Joe decided to leave the thread title that invited personal judgements to be made of a fellow poster's right to post.

The ojections were NOT in fact TO the individual named - but what they posted and the potential offence and harm done by this content. This was the important issue. But our volunteers setting the example of actually choosing (out of a choice of 3) to leave that title in place and choosing (anonymously) to both delete and re-open this one - is I fear only going to encourage the idea that personal judgement of fellow posters is acceptable and starting threads - with titles to this end - is a good thing.

Perhaps it can finally be accepted that imposed censorship is DIFFICULT and PROBLMATIC. A case of being damned if you do and damned if don't. That is why - UNLESS YOU REALLY ARE FORCED TO - imposing your personal tastes upon the freely given contributions of others - without their knowledge or permission should NOT EVER be undertaken as a matter of routine. Which is now sadly the case.

What something appears to be the obvious solution - very often turns out in the long-run - not to be the easy option that it promised to be and sometimes becomes a far bigger problem that the one it was set-up to address. When the tail starts to wag the dog - it is often difficult to convince others that the dog is in fact as friendly as it is claimed to be.

Without being accused of a double standard - how can our volunteers now pursuade a poster starting a thread with a title that invited personal judgements of a named fellow poster - that this was not a practice to be encouraged?