An explanation of the lock of the thread posted by Fearless

[dsc]

The OP wasn't against the statement of purpose of this form, and but for the awful behavior on this site in regards to primaries, I would have let it stand, but sadly the primary can't be discussed on this website without bitterness and hatred unless the hosts of this forum decide to become full time policemen of the conduct of everyone who may post here. Just one post in we already had snarky bullshit from a person who does pretty much nothing but that in GDP. The fact is I, and the other hosts, don't have the time, nor the desire to police the conduct of every member of this site, nor do we want a ban list the size of the phone book. It is sad it has come to that, but the fact is the jury system won't stop this forum from becoming GDP gay edition and the hosts shouldn't have to, so the only remaining way is for there to be a hard and fast rule. We can't discuss the primary in this group. It is sad that because of the decent of this website into puerile bullshit that we can't have an adult discussion of the issues that affect LGBT citizens in our primary, but again it took just one post before the snarky bullshit started.

[Fearless]

1. I will post here my one and only rebuttal of this statement and be on my way.

Discussions of Bernie and Hillary (and all candidates) and their LGBT tendencies are an important matter to the LGBT community. In the past if someone pissed on our discussions we blocked them from our group and continued our valuable discussion. We should be able to openly discuss in our safe haven, the merits and demerits of Democratic candidates because the election of the next president will greatly impact our well-being.

Have a nice day everyone.

[Aerows]

2. I'll step right up to the plate

I also participated in that thread and clearly stated that I thought it was absolutely within the parameters of our group.

I stated it, even though it was locked *after* I dissented.

I know we have bigger fish to fry than one locked post, but damn. Why silence a discussion just because you are partial to the other candidate?

It was germane to the discussion of gay rights.

Locking a post concerning gay rights in the LGBT forum is rather ridiculous.

[dsc]

5. fine police the forum yourself

oh and your post which accuse me of bias is exactly why I wanted that thread locked. But again, you all police this. I won't be posting in those threads. I won't be reading those threads. I won't be banning members. I will do nothing in regards to those threads since I apparenty am nothing but a biased piece of crap.

[Aerows]

6. Okay - calm down

Nobody said any of that dsc, let alone me.

Other people were asking about it, so that's why I mentioned it.

Hosting anything, MIRT and the main forums is a pain in the ass. You are damned if you do and damned if you don't.

I'm sorry if it seemed like I was channeling the horde of people that went ballistic because I locked a post in GD or the 20 post thread about a person everyone had already agreed should be banned, but questioned me like I had evil intentions because I inadvertently made a fucking typo.

So yeah, I know how it feels, and if I made you feel like that in any way, I'm sorry.

[dsc]

7. I am sorry I over reacted

thanks for your gracious response.

[Aerows]

8. Can I offer you a

?

We are all in this together, heinously idiotic, idiotic or plain heinous as it may be at times.

[Aerows]

3. How is the discussion of a politician

and their views on gay rights not cogent in this forum and its Safe Haven statement?

It should not have been locked, period.

I think it is definitely in line with this forum to discuss politicians and their stances on issues relevant to the LGBT community. What are we here for if we can't discuss LGBT matters within the context of politics?

[dsc]

4. fine I have unlocked it

I won't lock any other threads about candidates. And I would have locked one about Hillary to for that matter but fine. If this become GDP then so be it.