I must admit to being puzzled and a little disappointed by the many, I am sure well intended, calls for 'ignoring.' Would you ignore untruths told about you that were spread throughout a community you care about? Would you feel it an effective response to do this? If you asked any politician they would respond 'NO' because they have learned that untruths unanswered become truth in a significant part of a community. If Oz were only hyperventilating a bit he could be ignored safely and effectively, and I would recommend that course of action. However, he makes aggresively false statements about actual people. He attacks people and spreads information potentially harmful to them, sometimes when those people are not present to defend themselves. I have avoided many of the Oz wars, I have ignored his self-serving and program-destructive posts, but that leaves his posts that meet the criteria I mentioned above. I don't think in good conscience you can give him free ride on those sorts of things. Even if you excuse the annoyance at his constant and voluminous postings you should not excuse everthing.

I heartily re-point out the absolutely changed nature of the board outside Oz presence. The same was true when he was briefly offline during the holiday. This place is different, no doubt about it. The 'feel' is back. I mean, this is a guy who brags about 'leaving a string be for 7 hours'...this when a look at the time shows that is sleep time in Australia... what a guy!

To the thread topic I add my view that moderation/controls are not likely to change much and be a lot of work for people. This problem is extremely well circumscribed. The hesitation I have is that if precedent is set for removing people for something other than profanity there is of course some danger that the definition for removal could begin a journey from the present almost non-existent possibility toward enforcement of a politically correct or fairly narrow allowance for the expression of ideas. However, in this case I still think removal is the answer. Oz does not spread just bad ideas (those I would have to accept, perhaps occasionally challenge) he spreads untruth that has destructive force, that, in my opinion, is unacceptable.