[Religion Moderator]

I am more concerned with patterns than individual cases, whether sources or posters (everyone can a bad day now and again.)

For instance, if a website has a few hateful articles that speaks poorly of the website - but the website itself is not on my "do not allow" list. However, if the website has a pattern of hateful articles, then I will not tolerate it here.

So if you believe tfp.org should be treated the same as chick.com - then convince me by a preponderance of evidence that tfp.org is a hate mongering website/organization.

[P-Marlowe]

the website itself is not on my "do not allow" list.

Are you speaking of the Jack Chick website?

[Mad Dawg]

Okay, I have a question. My recollection, an increasingly unreliable thing, is that if you call a thread "Caucus" then people ought not to come in and tangle. Did I just make that up out of my head or is that a real rule?<p..And if it isn't it should be, and if it IS, then we ought to use it more often. Sometimes it's probably good to sharpen our claws in each other on the big ol' questions, but a lot of the time we don't get to look into nuance because we're all busy with somebody who says that the people who disagree with him may be perfectly nice people but WOW are they wrong!