> Exactly how is discussing faith threatening? If you don't believe, you don't believe.
Ask Tom I guess, because I never said it was.
> BTW, it used to be this was "Anything goes"...
Not anymore.
> So once you start banning people and censoring, how do you determine what to censor > and who to ban? by public opinion? and do you censor both sides, i.e. "pro" and > "anti" religious discussion or all religious discussion?
I'll simply do absolutely whatever I want. I might start a poll system for possible bans, to make it easier on myself.
> There's a lot of topics discussed that could be viewed as "offensive", frag the site > advertises "not safe for work" threads for a reason.
I don't know where "offensive" came into play. Was it something I wrote and forgot? I'm looking at the socially retarded issue. Undiagnosed Ass Burgers.
> In the long run a site doesn't have to be "fair" and it can do whatever it wants, but > like I *and Tom* stated, that's a slippery road.
Don't care.
> If long term people leave because they can't handle either ignoring a discussion or > accepting the fact there will be discussions they don't like, I don't know what to > say. Name me one messageboard anywhere where all discussions are approved or have to > be approved by a majority let alone everyone.
Index 
Flat 
Re: Intelligence Quotient tests are -----.
Reply
Re: Intelligence Quotient tests are -----.
