cbayer
(146,218 posts)Non-safe is not what this is. It is not considered a "safe haven" but it is not a "non-safe haven". If someone comes in and is repeatedly and flagrantly disruptive, they may need to be blocked. Once in awhile someone comes in and is so disruptive right off the bat that they may need to be blocked while the jury system or MIRT gets to them.
If the reason that we only want one host is because there will be a policy that no one will ever get blocked, then I can not support that. To be clear, I am adamantly opposed to any decision to never block anyone as a matter of policy. Unless I recall incorrectly, you strongly supported some blocks in this group, or do you only remember the blocks of your friends? What has caused your change of heart?
What idiocy are you talking about? I will absolutely not support a hostless group, but I could be persuaded to support a single host.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):