I agree with Geo1004 100%. It certainly is lacking in taste to discuss Ozstamps unless he's around to both read & post.

Having said that, I do think its important to debate something else that this thread has again revealed, and that I think has been present ever since Ozstamps was banned. This "collective attitude" is something that comes up from time to time in various threads, it is present in the Chat room, and seems to be one of those "unwritten rules" that everyone on FT is expected to follow. It appears that to some members of this community, it is not OK to have an opinion that is contrary to "the OK thing to do" (as was pointed out by Punki). Specifically, I am saying that I think that anybody that "dares" to not jump on the bandwagon and slaughter Ozstamps is immediately branded as a "traitor to the FT community". What is this nonsense…? Aren't we all entitled to our opinion?

For the record, I pretty much share Punki's view on the " Oz Saga ". I think that while Oz did show some serious lack of tact and certainly turned aggressive on various community members, Oz was not only a conflictive member (to some), but he also uncovered a great deal here & there, thereby doing his part to contribute to the collective gain of the community. He also brought in a number of new people to the boards and contributed to the overall increase in traffic. There are examples of people that are still among us that only stir up controversy and contribute very little, yet we apparently are willing to put up with them….? I apologize, maybe I need someone to explain things slowly to me, but I certainly don't follow this brand of logic.

I would ask, why does Punki have to be subject to ridicule and offense (I refer to the post by dallasflyer and the "my a**" comment by dhammer53) just because she thinks Ozstamps was unfairly treated? Is it OK for us as a community to jump in the protection of those that were attacked by Oz but at the same time harass others for not agreeing to beat up on him? What sort of a double standard is this? Why are those of us that think that Oz should be given one last chance to redeem himself suddenly branded as "bad guys"?

Forgive me for singling out dhammer and dallasflyer above, they just happened to post in this thread and I use their posts as a reference only of an attitude that I think is widespread across our community (and its executed not only against Punki, as I exemplify here).

I don't want or expect everyone to like everyone on these boards. Heck, I have my fair share of detractors on FT (and that list may grow with this post). Sure, many people that are avid contributors here were greatly offended by what Oz did and will probably never forgive him. That's for each and everyone to decide. But, do those that feel that way have to take things so far as to attack others for their different opinions? If the community were to decide to allow him back, why can't those against that just ignore him?

For us to really function as a community, I think (IMHO) that we need to practice what we preach, and by that I mean allow for freedom of speech and opinion. Those of us that don't think Oz is the Anti-Christ should be allowed to roam the realms of FT without being discriminated.

I just recently met one of the FTers most affected by Ozstamps' behavior and we discussed this issue. This FTer has a very strong opinion on the issue and will probably never be on close terms with Oz, but despite the fact that we agreed to disagree, he/she never used my opinion against me. Instead, he/she took the high ground and respected my point of view. I know that our disagreement will not impede us from developing a cordial relationship. I believe he/she has set a standard for all of us in this community to follow.

------------------
Gaucho100K