well, since you asked
 

Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>1. Why do I think it was a bad idea? Well, first and foremost, I abhor censorship.<br /><br /> I didn't find his comments that out of line, and although his delivery could have been better, I believe questions about your objectivity are fair game, as I mentioned in the locked thread. I believe you should be held to a higher standard, like he said. I would be happy to go into that further, but others claim it's a dead horse, so I'm not sure it's a good idea to do so. As for the allegation that you were a liar, that referenced e-mails between the two of you concerning REA, and since e-mails are off limits, I don't see how that one gets resolved. The rest was a rehash of prior battles over the ad banner debate, and even if it is concluded that such subject is old news, so what? Members should just go to another thread; in fact, we are often told that if something bothers us or we find it uninteresting, to just move along.<br /><br /> I also do not find this thread very persuasive. First, I don't believe Jay was frequently at the epicenter of any 100 post threads that have caused some to sour on this forum--re-read those threads, and you will see others more prominently displayed. Rather, what got Jay banned were his pointed questions to you, Leon. Now I'm not necessarily saying you have to put up with it until the end of time or as it gets worse and worse, but I find it odd that you say you banned Jay because you had to listen to what the board says. As far as I'm concerned, if you were not offended or bothered, or did not think his shots at you were worthy of banishment, then that's the end of it. If YOU felt otherwise, then act upon it, but don't give us that had to listen to the membership line. That particlar explanation, combined with the insinuation that Jay was at the heart of many 100 post "trainwrecks" both sound like copouts to me. Incidentally, I find it amusing where people keep saying it's Leon's board and he can do what he likes. While I disagree with that, if people truly believe it, then why are so many sending you e-mails to throw in their bitching and moaning? <br /><br />Several other points are probably worth discussing, but I already started this 45 minutes ago and got a lengthy phone call I had to take.<br /><br />2. Would I have banned him? No.<br />

well, since you asked
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Todd- I respect your opinion but let me play devil's advocate. First, I don't think banning Jay was an act of censorship. It wasn't so much that he held an opinion that Leon just couldn't deal with and threw him out. My take was Jay brought up the same point about advertisers incessantly, and would never let up on it. Leon was more than patient with him an explained why he thought banner advertsing wasn't a bad thing. But Jay wouldn't quit- he just kept going, and apparently one time too many.<br /> <br />Also, do you see any transgression on this board that is worth a ban? I was attacked ceaselessly by Joe Peleaz as many people know, and to this day I haven't even an inkling why. He also attacked numerous other people and likewise never let up. Was it okay to ban him?

well, since you asked
 

Posted By: <b>JK</b><p>My thoughts cut and pasted from the other thread on Jay's Banning:<br /><br />"I have, to this point, stayed out of this mess. I will first state that I agree with Todd that banning Jay was a bad idea - though in all honesty, I dont believe that his contributions will be missed because, quite frankly, he hasn't really attempted to contribute positively in some time. My problem with the banning is that Jay's attacks were directed at Leon and Leon decided to ban Jay simply because he was tired of it. Jay has an opinion and while its old and tired, his "attacks" weren't all that insulting. On the other hand, Ive seen others attacked - I mean truly attacked and insulted - without so much as a "tone it down" from any of the mods. This reeks of a double standard. A post above made an analogy to the workplace - well, certainly management would not stand for constant insubordination directed toward management. However, nor would management allow employees to go about attacking other non-management employees with abandon. So if you are going to stop one, be consistent. <br /><br />Personally, I dont think the board needs to be free of all "attacks". Often times, they person attacked brings it on themselves (not saying this is the case with Jay/Leon). I just have a problem when most everything is allowed to go unfiltered as long as you put a name next to your post, yet Jay is banned simply because we are collectively tired of hearing his rants.<br /><br />Finally, a lot has been mentioned about a post generally being negative to generate any interest. That is too true. Unfortunately, I dont believe banning Jay will stop the train wrecks or increase the quality of the posts that are actually on topic - to me, I'd rather see something being done to try generate more on topic posts and dialog within those posts."<br /> <br />

well, since you asked
 

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Would you guys mind if this stayed in the other thread? I think it would be best to have it there instead of in 2 at once.....these 2-3 posts are over there anyway. I do disagree with most of what has been said so far, by the way...I will elaborate when we pick a thread...<br /><br />edited a period to question mark <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

well, since you asked
 

Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>I posted this in the wrong place, so I hit edit, wiped out everything, re-titled it delete, and moved back to the other thread. I don't know what happened after that. mea culpa

well, since you asked
 

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>this can be debated in the other thread...I have done the same thing....no biggie on that...