Ordinarily I would agree with you. But in this case, the poster made a good faith effort to post it as a caucus but didn’t know how and sent me a Freepmail which I did not see until the damage was already done. It was my fault, not his. So I cleaned up my mess, not yours.
Among my non-virtual friends, in my non-virtual life, I'm often criticized for extending too much benefit of the doubt to folks. I was probably the last person in the United States to come to the conclusion that perhaps Michael Jackson might have had some,... ah,... inappropriate contact with some children. I still don't think that the prosecution proved OJ’s guilt in court.
But I gotta tell ya, this one pegs my benefit-o’-doubtometer:
“But in this case, the poster made a good faith effort to post it as a caucus but didn’t know how...”
Didn't know how? Really? Didn't know how to type the letters c-h-a-r-i-s-m-a-t-i-c c-a-u-c-u-s into the title of the thread? Wow.
Or maybe rather, he forgot? And remembered after the fact? Perhaps, not having posted many threads, he forgot the requirement necessary to make it a caucus thread? And only remembered after the first initial critical remarks appeared from non-caucus members?
Maybe I'm quibbling, but I think it makes a difference.
The thread really was up for five hours as a non-caucus thread. If someone truly and really was actually incapable of making the thread a caucus thread, I could understand the bowdlerization necessary to turn it into one five hours after the fact. But if they merely forgot because they're a little inexperienced at it, I think that perhaps it might have been preferable to recommed posting a new thread with the caucus label, and permitting this one to remain an open thread.
The slight, the harm done to others is minor. But it isn't unreal.
sitetest