Agree with this.

[PenguinTrax]

And the funny thing is, I started a thread so that you could discuss the issue and noone has posted in it. Because they aren't interested or because I posted that personal attacks wouldn't be allowed? Only the Shadow knows for sure....

[SydneyK]

Originally Posted by PenguinTrax

I started a thread so that you could discuss the issue and noone has posted in it.

If there were only one thread, people would definitely be posting in it, but with so many threads to choose from, it's difficult to know where to start. My experience has been that, when there is more than one thread on the same topic, mods merge them together so people can read ONE thread instead of having to wade through a whole swamp of threads.

There are posts I'd like to respond to but I don't feel like I can simply because I disagree with that poster. It's difficult to respond in Thread B to someone's post in Thread A. People usually read posts in one thread before moving on to another, so if I quote a post (from Thread A) in Thread B it is confusing to everyone and seems illogical and out of place.

I understand that one of the points in having two separate threads is simply an attempt to keep things civil, but one of the points of posting is to share different POVs. How can anyone grow intellectually (and yes, I realize intellectual growth is not the primary goal of GC, but still, I think it's important) if they are allowed to share only those POVs that are already in agreement?

[PenguinTrax]

Tell you what, I'll lock the original two threads and everyone can have a free for all in the pro/anti discussion

[AlphaFrog]

Originally Posted by PenguinTrax

Tell you what, I'll lock the original two threads and everyone can have a free for all in the pro/anti discussion

That's really all we're asking for. Thank you.

But if you're going to let it be a free-for-all...let it be a free-for-all.