Posted By:
Tim NewcombCorey,
Your reasoning on the "two things" post escapes me:
"[Jay] (2) was asked to stop saying such things but persisted. ....
[this] (2) falls under "repeated after a warning".
Isn't the whole point of free speech, which Leon says he supports, that you can't legitimately be forced to "stop saying such things" that are unpopular?
Let's see: X says something Y dislikes. Y warns X not to do it again. X does it again. Then Y can do anything he wants to X, just because X was warned????
Doesn't sound like free speech to me.
_________________________
This issue seems like the crux of the whole Leon-Jay problem.
On the one hand, I'm pretty sure Leon was a lot more patient with Jay than many would have been in his position, and that Jay did his position no favors by being so relentless in expressing it.
On the other hand, Jay (or anybody) should have the right to express the unpopular opinion AS OFTEN AS HE WANTS, period. That doesn't mean you, I, or anyone has to pay attention to him.
I for one did pay attention to his contentions, at least for a long time until they seemed to become merely repetitive, because I am deeply suspicious of Mastro and I don't like the idea that they might be given sweetheart status by those who run the board. I think Leon knows my view on this. I am also willing to agree to disagree with him on this issue without destroying our relationship. But I don't think anybody who disagrees more vocally should be stifled.
And it's clear from this thread that a lot of regular posters feel it was not a good decision.
But maybe a cooling-off period was necessary for emotional reasons. That I can live with.