Hi QQ. My ride is late, so I have about 30 minutes. I checked bak and saw this and logged back in to answer you. No naivete', mate. Too old for that. Just a straightforward guy expecting the best from people as a first expectation, and often getting it! That is why it was so disappointing to have the closed thread 'trigger finger' response to my pleas in-thread for the mods to get rid of the trolls. This has occurred more than enough times here and elsewhere. That is experience, not naivete' where I am coming from on this. And since it is in the hands of the members of a forum to shape that forum as they would wish according to good principles of science and humanity, should the 'difficulties' encountered be excuse for giving over the forum to the trolls and malicious types? All over the world, govts are engaged in reviewing and implementing 'internet standards'. Are members of sites such as these not allowed to set and expect standards here without being forced to by some authority or other? No. We should all be proactive if we are not to just capitulate and hand the internet over to the trolls etc. And I agree, it WAS (sorry, QQ) a 'magnanimous gesture' from AN. That is why it pained me to decline the offer, based on past experience, not naivete'. The original problem was the issue. And the 'offer' would have done nothing to solve that. I was not prepared to spend more time in repeating the scenario in a new thread unless the trolls were controlled and prevented from sppiling that thread also. See what I mean? What good is the shifting about when the trolls follow and the mods do nothing about it? I did already say to prometheus that the victim in this case is only the tip of the iceberg of cases, and that the victim is not obliged to be grateful for token magnanimity when the problem will only rear its ugly head again elsewhere. Better if the problem was faced squarely in the original thread as suggested, and none of this to-do would have been necessary. If the problem has now been 'aired out' sufficiently, the solution must be clear by now: control the trolls in the original threads instead of closing them and rewarding the trolls. This constant closing/aborting of discussion flow is NOT GOOD (again, sorry QQ) for science, this site or anyone else (except the trolls). I trust there has been enough talk. How about we all concentrate on controlling the trolls etc and just letting discussions proced properly where the OP is not immediately offensive, hey? Then the mod actions will have some purchase because the discussion will have been fair and proper for long enough to make the decision accordingly and without genuine members having cause for complaint. Just because the current state of 'internet forums' is woeful (elsewhere), it does not mean it should be forever so. We have the power to make Sciforums a real excellent site for its role. Discourses in science and humanity. Courteously as possible given the goodwill of all concerned (that excludes trolls by definition, hey!). Thanks again for your evenhanded approach, mate. Much appreciatd (as was AN's gesture to open another thread....which I may take up if the problem currently affecting the threads is solved reasonably well and quickly). Cheers! PS: AN, prom, everyone, is it possible to re-open the original thread and just remove the off-topic/trolls etc and just continue that discussion as was? Any reasons why not? Thoughts? PPS: QQ: I am not a moderator, so my time etc constraints are not an issue. However, a moderator that is severely constrained in his efficacy/effectivenes by time etc problems is not in a good position to start with. And hence the problems that have arisen. I can claim time etc constraints (and sometimes that is why I have to leave a thread foe a few days while others make their requested contribution). I find that my absences are not problematic because they usually allow a fuller discussion on the wider context of all the responses in the meantime, rather than 'piecemeal' and 'cross-purpose' exchanges etc. That's my stated MO and all are fairly advised of same in my threads. Each to his own. As long as the discussion is constructive then no problem. But if time etc constraints severely and adversely affect the moderation, then that's another kettle of fish (which is hat we are dealing with in all this). .