>>>Out of curiosity, is your pov coloured by the fact that Michel's company is on the internet instead of bricks and mortar? If his business were bricks and mortar and someone came in and started swearing and verbally abusing people, would you still feel the owner had no right to kick him out?
>>
>>I don't your analogy of Nick walking in Michel's workplace and swearing works at all. Michel is running a salon, where people come to talk. Sometimes, conversation gets heated in a salon. You don't throw out everyone who lets a swearword or even an ad hominem argument get by; you throw out the people who do it repeatedly.
>>
>>Tamar
>
>That's a very good point. :o) I agree. If someone goes 'overboard' then they typically will be asked to apologize or they will apologize on their own, but they typically won't get kicked out unless they do it repeatedly.
>
>Still, it is Michel's "salon" so he can make the rules. I'm surprised he is quick to ban though without prior warnings because that will certainly decrease the participation in his "salon."

The 'alternative' would likely require full-time employment for someone keeping scores of violations, dispensing warnings and checking that both sides are happy, i.e. if left side got 3 warnings for 5 profanities yesterday, then right side should get exactly the same tomorrow. Every apology should be scrutinized by bi-partisan commission, just in case of hidden jabs and so on.