dgolds - your comments above are very interesting and thought provoking. I do agree that the high signal-noise is a great asset to FlyerTalk. I am inclined to say that users who post insults and flames should be strongly encouraged not to do so and to edit out the contents of their existing posts. This could include warnings fom the moderators and private email from those who are offended by the post. I am very sympathetic to your point that flames and junk posts discourage new users but hopefully there is so little of it here at the moment that noone will actually be discouraged. It may become a bigger problem in the future as the board continues to grow.

I suppose the best solution I can think of is careful pruning of offensive posts by an administrator. I have less of an objection to individual posts being censored than to the deletion of entire threads where some of the content is valuable. Much as I don't like it, I belive it will become an uncomfortable practical necessity if the board is to function as well as it does now, in future.

All this would have to be done in a framework of clearly defined, public guidelines. The board already automatically censors foul language, for instance. As a possible scenario, offensive comments, with no frequent-flyer content could be deleted in respose to a complaint. In a case where a post contains both useful information and flame, the moderator could give the poster a choice of whether to edit the offending sections or have the post deleted.

All this makes me uncomfortable to varying degress but I do see it as a balancing act between practical necessity and freedom to say what one likes. As I have stated previously, I wish the administration would use their power to lock threads more often, when they start to get out of hand. If that is done, someone has to deliberately begin a new thread if they want to restart an arguement. It then becomes obvious to all users who the antagonists are.

I assume in extreme cases, the board is subject to the libel and defamation laws of the United States (and Colorado?).

An alternative solution is a technical one that has been mentioned before - a squelch function that enables your preferences to 'ignore' the posts of a specific user. Thus you have a filter against individuals who continually spam or flame.

It's certainly a challenging question dgolds - and thank you for encouraging me to consider it. I will post again if I have any flashes of inspiration.


[This message has been edited by james (edited 09-28-1999).]