Orange_Magnum
member
In another thread, on the second amendment and the meaning of militia, moderator Jeff White closed it down after a member posted to the thread how a current politician defined the second amendment, with the motivation that politics are never discussed here. Why is it that moderators always have to act like dictators on the Internet? I was booted from another gun forum a month ago after having pointed out inconsistencies in the rulings of the dictator-like moderators there.
Every other thread here is about Obama, or urgent calls to sign petitions drawn up by politicians and law makers regarding the current gun laws, or the politics of the gun companies in their doings. What I'm saying is that everything on this gun forum relates to politics in one way or the other. To irratically close down a thread like moderator Jeff White did doesn't belong in a democratic meeting place such as this. Can't we discuss freely gun related topics? Is Jeff White the Web Master of his own server, or has he misunderstood his duties and privelegies? With this thread, the purpose is not to single out moderator Jeff White, but rather start a healthy discussion of what moderators can and can't do.
What do you all think about this?
Every other thread here is about Obama, or urgent calls to sign petitions drawn up by politicians and law makers regarding the current gun laws, or the politics of the gun companies in their doings. What I'm saying is that everything on this gun forum relates to politics in one way or the other. To irratically close down a thread like moderator Jeff White did doesn't belong in a democratic meeting place such as this. Can't we discuss freely gun related topics? Is Jeff White the Web Master of his own server, or has he misunderstood his duties and privelegies? With this thread, the purpose is not to single out moderator Jeff White, but rather start a healthy discussion of what moderators can and can't do.
What do you all think about this?