If you're going to moderate and edit post at least make it clear you have edited them so people will know that is ISNT a post entirely by the user?
I disagree with draconian moderation that allows a certain user to continually post ill-informed opinion unchecked whilst removing ALL the posts that ask him to back up his claims or provide evidence for them. Thereby allowing a user to post potentially dangerous or at best completely misleading posts with no come-back at all.
I don't normally do this, but its your call regarding airing this difference of opinion in the thread rather than in a pm, so here's my position.
The edits are noted in the post and they are also noted in the footer explaining the reason for the edit. I only cut the inflamatory material, I added nothing so everything that is left is posted by the user. If the user re-edits, it will show in the footer.
Lets also look at the issue from the OP's perspective - he started the thread and he owns it. He asked a simple question and two members started going at with personal insults based on opinions and biases that started well outside of and well before this thread. That is not anything I consider to be on topic. He then posts to that effect, and then feels the need to aplogize for causing a controversy. He has no need to aplogize and he did not deserve the responses he got. At that point moderation is both warranted and overdue.
What a wonderful way to welcome people to the tech forum. Please try to remember that as a technical diver, your actions reflect on the rest of us who are represented in and by this forum.
As for the specific stuff remaining in the edited posts that you feel may be dangerous or misleading absent a more enlightened response:
1. Get V-planner.
2. Gear choice is personal and should not be infringed.
3. A tongue in cheek comment about methods of propulsion being defined as scooter use.
None of the three are things a reasonable person would construe as being unsafe in and of themselves. The third is a bit sarcastic but the smiley emoticon does suggest humous intent. I let it live. It is my call as the draconian moderator to do that.
The "GUE always trying to sell halcyon" comment was perhaps misleading, but it was addressed by another member without getting personal. I'll address it further to ensure no one is misled:
Personally, I can see where some people may feel that way and a trip through downtown High Springs can tend to lead you to make a similar connection between GUE and Halcyon. The principle characters in both are historically somewhat intertwined. However oo be fair, I have seen instructors who push OMS or Dive Rite products just as adamantly in their classes so it really is an instructor issue not an agency or company issue.
In the future, please feel free to address anything that you feel may be unsafe or misleading, but please do so in a manner that does not insult others, respects the rights of others to express their opinions, respects the reality that opinions will differ and that there is room for a fairly wide variety of opinion in the technical diving community. If you don't agree with that, consider hanging out in the DIR forum where the range of acceptable opinion is by design more narrowly focused and more defined to avoid these types of disagreements.
Generally refuting an opinion that you feel is dangerous or misleading is most effectively done by posting your opinion and supporting evidence rather than challenging others to defend their statement(s) and perhaps questionable rationale. When you just challenge someone, especially someone with weak credentials, you are effectively handing them control of the argument. When that occurs, you are just feeding into their desire to argue or create controversy and you allow the other party to continue stating comments, opinion and perhaps defamatory remarks with no real obligation to support their case. When that happens moderation is virtually inevitable as a person with no real case when challenged directly will almost always respond with a character assasination to try to discredit their challenger or at least draw them away from a logical argument. If you bite on that, they win everytime.
You need to own your responsibility for what happens in a thread. In a real sense, you have a great deal of control over the eventual need for moderation even when you are not the offending party by choosing your approach carefully and not creating the opportunity for them to take pot shots.
Like our mama's all told us, - it takes two to fight.
