Hello, CM
I've noticed a few posts from you, but I'm not sure what your position is. As close as I can tell, your biggest complaint is that you don't feel iHub should use The Jailhouse to change an inmate's behavior.
The circumstances, as they appear to me, are that people are put in jail because, in one way or another, they disrupt iHub. They are kept in jail until they renounce their disruptiveness. If they don't wish to do so, it is their own choice. That is not frontal lobotomy.
I don't want to appear simplistic, but I see no alternatives: Disruptive behavior is unacceptable. Either the inmate forswears that behavior and is returned to full privileges, or not. Matt has clearly demonstrated great forbearance. From what I've seen, someone has to get pretty far out of line before Matt will do anything about it. That fact, by itself, means that the burden of proof is on the inmate.
We must never forget that we are guests in someone else's "house", here by sufferance.
Someone recently posted the number of members on iHub and commented on its growth. Of all the members, there are only a miniscule number who are trouble-makers. The vast majority of people who come to iHub conduct their business with propriety and a minimum of fuss. They do not want to be harassed. Refusing to allow that harrassment strikes me as a management obligation.
Fred
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
