I see you are offended about the shutdown matter, which was handled through a private email sent to you, which you did not reply to, by the way. I have looked over the mails and can't think how we could have put it in more polite tones.
It also seems you won't let the knickers-in-a-twist matter rest either. I wish you wouldn't rehash something I've already answered to and make me go around in circles covering the same ground. I have already explained this is what happened, in this order, chronologically:
A pro-TFI person posted in a bad manner, belittling someone's concerns, using what I considered abrasive language, and issued imperatives in response to things that weren't even said or implied.
I pointed out the deficiencies, outlining mannerisms typical of pro-TFI posters which are not acceptable.
CB pointed out that knickers-in-a-twist comments aren't considered abrasive in the US.
I conceded to this point, but elaborated on where the line has to be drawn and why.
You tell me that I cannot say that anyone who says knickers-in-a-twist is pro-TFI, and I tell you I never said that, and that is not the singular reason why I objected to his posting manner.
You keep insisting I cannot say point 2 because of point 3, but point 2 came before point 3, and I moved on to point 4—and from here we are in an endless loop.
You wrote: "I am also super much for fairness...if someone is just targeted, because he has a somewhat pro TFI-thought...then I think we're not ready for any broader dialogue..."
And I already replied that it wasn't the pro-TFI dialog, but rather the non-dialog I was objecting to:
You wrote: "b)There should be a space, where one can discuss TFI-doctrine, without anyone yelling: this is religious...if someone can't stand the mentioning of ...he/she should refrain from going on that board...discussing that...there are tons of theologians/philosophers, who write about the concepts of God...without being believers...actually that should basically be no problem...in general"
Personally, I find it amazing that anybody would have such a hard time with a simple rule about no religion on genX. Talk all you want about TFI-doctrine, but if you wish you answer to it in a religious context, move it over to Journeys. Examples:
Someone posts on GenX about a news article about temple prostitution. On GenX, we can discuss it historically and which religions have had such practices, mention TFI abuses and even how Berg used the bible to justify FFing. The minute someone wants to say why it is wrong from a a biblical perspective, move it over to Journeys and quote bible verses over there. Easy!
If an atheist posts about why he/she doesn't believe in God, that discussion belongs on Journeys, and he/she can expect replies by Christians quoting the bible. Simple!
I will take your suggestions about board platforms under advisement, but personally, I am happy to keep the format as is. In any case, reworking them would involve much more work than we can afford. I hope you will find a way to be get some use out of them, and I hope you understand it is our job to be the coordinators, even though we aren't perfect.
You wrote: "By the way...if you don't understand something...why don't you copy and paste and ask for clarification...happened now more than once???"
To be honest, and at the risk of offending you, sometimes it is quite difficult to understand you, especially when you get rambly and convoluted. Lately I have trouble understanding at least half of what you write. It would help if you could keep your sentences simple and focused.