I don't know who posted these posts, but obviously they were removed. So, it would appear if the offending party was the same person then that individual would be booted off FR.
Maybe I am mistaken.
Here are the rules as posted (my copy and paste) on the Religion Moderator's profile page.
Ecumenic[al] threads.
What can be posted? Articles that are reasonably not antagonistic. Reply posts must never be antagonistic.
What will be pulled? Antagonistic reply posts. If the article is inappropriate for an ecumenic discussion, the tag will be changed to open.
Who will be booted? Antagonists
What can be posted? Anything but the beliefs of those who are not members of the caucus
What will be pulled? Reply posts mentioning the beliefs of those who are not members of the caucus. If the article is inappropriate for a caucus, the tag will be changed to open.
Who will be booted? Repeat offenders.
So it seems to me that this offending person (if it was the same person, has been booted from FR. Hmmmm.
My thread looks scourged, just like Professor Howell. Thanks for the Catholic support, Salvation!
Here are the rules as posted (my copy and paste) on the Religion Moderator's profile page.Finally. Fifty posts later, SOME clarification. Thank you.
I am still not clear on exactly who is allowed to post what on threads like these. Sorry.
In the future, I will continue to just LURK on these kinds of "Religion" threads, and not post -- but in the humble opinion of this ten-year member of FR, posting a short explanation of the "rules of engagement" for a thread like this -- at the beginning of every thread like this -- would be a VERY good idea, to enlighten "newbies" to this little corner of the world.
Hard as it may be to believe, MANY of us who occasionally stumble onto threads like this -- because of the newsworthy aspects of a story like this -- are not clear on the rules here.
FWIW. :o)