<Off-Topic and Flame should be open to exactly what their titles imply. If I were to say, "Those knuckleheads at NASA screwed up the ISS hatch and caused yet another delay in its completion!!", the comment should be taken for exactly what it is; a space reference, laced with my own personal regard for something I have read. Regardless of what I call the dim-bulbs at NASA, this comment should be regarded as mine, and it should be noted as being a space reference.

Just how far one should go in the name-calling, either of the unknown entities of NASA, voted representatives of this fine nation, or even toward the fairly well-read minds on these boards is strictly between the moderator and the poster. I believe there should be limits to what is tolerated, but these limits should be self-employed -- that is, "You, as the poster, should know what your own mother would frown upon seeing in print by your own hand."

I also believe that the removal of damning posts should be more a matter of consensus. The final say, of course, is Justin’s, but if he were to receive a certain number of complaints, perhaps a number that would represent an acceptable percentage of those who post regularly here, I believe he should take some action on the subject. Also, this acceptable percentage does not necessarily have to be a physical majority, as a majority number would presuppose that a majority of posters have actually witnessed the damning message and would even spend the time required to email a complaint. Just pick a number of required complaints and stick by it. On the other hand, if there are no complaints, but Justin, as board owner, sees the particular posting that he feels to be potentially troublesome, he would, of course, hold the option to delete it without notice.

Dan