need for guidelines confirmed

[Moderator3]

Hello all.
Recently we've had some vivid exchanges which ended up becoming food throwing contests, the Moderators read them, allowed them. That was to demonstrate just how quickly this forum can deteriorate without guidelines. I hope everyone now realizes that.

So, break's over, let's get back to work. Thanks.

[Carto's Cutlass Supreme]

I'm 100 percent with moderator3. Things can go down fast without guidelines and close focus on the topic.

In fact it's even pushing it to have the subject of the holocaust once removed. For instance the holocaust's influence on society. Or why the holocaust gets media attention. Those are once removed. Whereas on topic is someone reviewing an early 60's Life magazine Eichmann interview.

I've had posts removed, and in hindsight it was best for the forum. If you ever have a post removed. Realize these people are on your side, but are helping in a way that might not be clear to you.

"Once removed" threads are sometimes allowed, but how often the direction goes to "thrice removed." I'm as guilty as anyone else.

And yes, it's understandable how exterminationists could have anger at revisionists; and it's understandable how revisionists could have anger at exterminationists, but the anger doesn't work well for debate, for persuasion, for an exchange of ideas. It might be cathartic to post, but it doesn't do much. More harm than good, as is so often the case with venting anger.

[steve]

Moderator,

First, thanks for keeping my post, "Legitimate Post" up.

My intention, on this Forum, and when I am discussing the H with people, is to get them to think reasonably about what I am saying about the H. At times, they may think I am being prejudiced by certain attitudes. I am trying to get them past a stumbling box.

Look, I think it was gasto who gave us a link to a forum discussing the H. After reading it, I came to better understand the need for Guidelines! Mudslinging is really a waste of time, and could even be childish after a while. My intention was not to change topics, but to get some people to understand that it is NOT certain attitudes that compel us to doubt the H, but rather the other way around. And the reason I tell them that is NOT to get them to have similar attitudes, but to get them to consider, that if I am telling the truth, that the H is indeed a fraud.

I am sure many of you feel the frustration when trying to present your side of this story. I know I do. And, I ask myself, what is keeping these people from seeing something so obvious? Sometimes, they think my 'other attitudes' are prejudicing me. I am merely trying to explain why that is not the case.

I hope this better explains my intentions.