Forums system wish list..

[Morrus]

I know you said close and not delete, but that is exactly my problem.

It was bad enough having the thread deleted when his rant was proven to be in error, but it would be, in my opinion, more damaging to have a thread locked but still readable that made a point but refuse to have anyone reply to it to provide a counter-point.

Going back to my example, if the thread had been locked right after the post had been made, then a whole lot of people could have read it and without my being able to reply wihtin the thread, many of them would never know the full story.

That's best handled on a case-by-case basis.

In the rare case that something like this has happened, I have closed the thread, but myself posted a statement from the "accused" (I believe it was Clark Peterson last time). That was handled by email - he asked if he could say something, I asked him to send it to me, read it and agreed to post it for him. The thread, however, remained closed.

However, sometimes a rebuttal isn't needed, and is often just an angry response (I've been guilty of this). If somebody posted "Hellhound's a poopoo=head!", there would be no reason to leave it open, and no reason to facilitate a rebuttal or response. If, on the other hand, they'd said "Hellhound stole my grandma's rocking chair", I would consider allowing a single response, depending on how it was phrased.