I don't want to start a non-conservatives board barring conservatives. That's like starting a sadist board and not inviting masochists to come play.
That you don't see that you do not have the right to ban me from the NOLIB board is not a surprise. It's what I would expect from you as my expectations are very low indeed. However, when you are in the public square and anyone can come by and fall into that cesspool of ideas then a fence should be put around it hence the need for a private room with a password so that you can keep people out for their own sake.
"Moderators should be allowed to moderate without your involvement. Moderators who cause problems should be evaluated. Is it the moderator or is it the whiners? Uninvolve yourself, the threads will live or die by their own merit. The TOU should dictate what your involvement is and the moderator's IBOX should be respected as a addition or a subtraction to those rules. The general public will either accept the moderator or they will reject it, that is their vote."
Part of my point here is that should a moderator set up a thread that purposefully causes the exclusion of posters simply because of their point of view AND that thread causes Admin problems then that moderator should be evaluated. Extraordinary rules are fine they are used in all kinds of ways to focus stock boards. But when extraordinary rules are used by a moderator in a way that causes complaints then those rules should be evaluated in terms of the basic TOU and that moderator should be evaluated as to his or her intentions.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
