>Why do people always have to claim first amendment when they
>don't like how someone runs THEIR OWN WEBSITE?
Let's not get too picky on the semantics, I think everyone understands what is meant by the original post, they are concerned about censorship on the forums.
>The first amendment has no relevance to this issue
>whatsoever.
Exactly, the point is relevance. If these forums, which are the "de facto" discussion group for the North American rally scene at the moment, are perceived to be "filtered" through some agenda or a place where people cannot freely express their opinions, then its relevance will be diminished.
That said, I think the administrators have done a reasonably good job in handling it. However...
>That said, having run internet forums myself, I think that
>closing such threads serves no valid purpose.
Me too, I run phorums that have more posts than every section on specialstage put together. The only posts I have deleted are the totally off-topic ones that are not posted in "off topic" areas.
Flame wars work themselves out in the end, and people can make their own judgements based on how the "combatants" present their cases.
>Asking serious questions on an Internet forum is like trying
>to drive a screw with a hammer. It might work eventually,
>but not the way you wanted it to.
That's a bit cynical, but you do have to take everything with a grain of salt, especially since (like in real life) a lot of people repeat information not because its right but because they heard it somewhere, and then restate it as a truth. Sometimes it's unintentional, somtimes it's to look like an "expert".
Anyway, my point being, some people definately need to lighten up on here and learn how to take a joke.
Skye Poier
Seattle, WA
Vive le Prole-le-Ralliat!
http://www.rallyrace.net/