This is a trick question.
So, as long as it is civilly, if an opposing view is presented, you agree that messages should not be deleted?
To determine if a post is deleted is very difficult, and the Chairperson will only learn with time and hopefully with some guidance.
A thread deemed to be about a "PUBLIC" Company, should discuss the pros and cons about that company. Any post relevant to that topic should stay. BUT, personal attacks, or wild goose chases and for that matter, hype with no found bases, should be addressed by the Chairperson.
Now, a thread deemed "PERSONAL", eg: "How to cook Fish", should have it's own focus. Posts that are relevant to the topic should remain. BUT if a BASHER comes on board and states "FISH KILL because they have mercury". Well, I believe that the post may be relevant about fish, but does not seem to address the main topic of the board...HOW TO COOK FISH...
I feel that if the Chairperson who started that thread does not want to keep it, he should have the right to delete it.
NOW, is this a perfect world?
Will people abuse the system?
This is hard to assess. BUT, the "Law of the BOARDS" will determine if that thread will be successful, because people will always have the choice to TUNE IN, or TUNE OUT.
LIVE and LET LIVE...
Policing of Public Threads about Public Companies, is something that should be done properly without bias to one or the other.
Private threads that deal with more general topics should be more at the discretion of the Chairperson, KNOWING that if not patrolled properly, THAT THREAD WILL NOT THRIVE! or will be limited to the few that want to conform!
A. MarketFusion
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
