Member deactivated

[Mike Ferguson]

I see this place as like a dinner party that Alistair and Robert are hosting.
It

Yes. Yes. And Yes. Exactly. This idea, combined with Liz's insightful comments square the argument for me. My feelings about any individual's manner on this forum are irrelevant. The rules of this "dinner party" are inherent in how we all got here in the first place and we are all complicit. I can take my marbles and go home if I need to but I don't think I can cry foul...or demand my membership fees back...or ask for a share of the profits from the forum as a contributor to content. Not only do Alistair and Robert get to/need to define the boundaries and their pores points, they get to keep all the profit.

[malachi]

Apparently some voices we would like to hear from the SCAA Board and elsewhere have reached a similar conclusion about this forum.

So this is about keeping the SCAA Board happy?

But, on the concept of active moderation of the forum, I say "please."

End of the day - it's not up to you or to me.
It's up to Alistair.

We've all provided our input on the topic.
Alistair?

[Kevin Cuddeback]

Alistair's input at the start of the thread was and remains sufficient for me.

[Tim Dominick]

There is enough justification for me, sorry it had to be this way. It is too bad it had to reach this point.

Jay has lots of positive things to contribute, but even with a public apology, he hung his friend out to dry and got way too personal. I would have a hard time accepting that apology, regardless of how unusual it might have been for Jay to issue a retraction/apology.

I gotta say these "old boys club" allusions are straight up bull shit and it is tiresome to see people beat that dead horse. If you really want to discuss board issues, pick up the damn phone and call a board member. They are surprisingly open to conversations.