>><snip>
>>>I applaud Michel and his staff for managing this forum. If they did not it could be shut down or loose participation of its members. The choice to obey the rules, and act in a civil manner is up to the individual. The right to manage the UT is up to Michel! Together this forum will either flourish or dissolve.
>><snip>
>>
>>Hey Tom,
>>
>>I assume that you also believe it should be done as fairly as possible? Moderated with an even hand and head? Or do these things not matter and the issue is simply whether it is controlled or not? Playing Devil's advocate, but I feel I earned the right to do so.
>
>Jay;
>
>Like many things in life a generalization does not answer every situation. The following generalization uses the UT as an example but may be applied to any Internet forum.
>
>Each individual will interpret fairness differently. In a true Democracy chaos reigns high. Everyone has an equal importance and the right to be heard as well as an equal value in any decision.
>
>This is not a Democracy – it is a business and as such it has rules to follow. If an individual wishes to go outside of the rules he or she must be willing to face the consequences. If you are willing to go outside the rules take ownership of your actions.
>
>Humans make mistakes, which are something common amongst mankind. If you do something wrong in life it is normally acceptable to apologize and move on. The apology may or may not be accepted. Again that is up to the individuals involved. You expect fair play on the part of the decisions makers you meet in life. At the same time if you act within the “rules of the game”, there should be little concern for any negative consequences.
>
>As a Catholic I was taught to “forgive and live”, which simply means to get on with life and not dwell upon negative events to the point of incapacitation.
>
>I will also say that if anyone has issues with the management of a web site they should address this upfront and in private. There is no one answer for any question.
>
>Tom

That's a good answer Tom. I believe though that a person has a social obligation, if they have taken on the responsibility of an open public forum, to be held to some rules also. The fact that we keep saying that "if you own a business you can do what you want" gives a lot of authority with not much responsibility. Extreme example (isn't that what debates are based on?) but what about a well known pro basketball player who supports charities for children and then is taped swearing at a little girl at a golf tournament. Letter of the law, they probably didn't do much wrong. Spirit of the law, big no-no. They have a social responsibility that comes with the territory that transcends the simple written rules.

For the record, I never shirked any responsibilities associated with my actions. Aways spoke out honestly and openly. I'm not sure I can say the same for everyone.