It wouldn't be so much work if you did not insist on policing everything that your users said. Let them say what they want to say. If it is not politically correct, and it is censored, then that shows that Webmaster is prejudiced--for whatever reason--toward those with aggressive opinions--in other words, people that are not like himself.
I realize that this is the InterWeb. There will be people who anonymously insult and criticize me. Fortunately, my skin is thicker than wax paper.
The policy should be something like:
"The purpose of this message board is to provide a forum for the free exchange of ideas. Views may not necessarily represent that of the owner ("Webmaster")." That way he doesn't look bad.
Or, we can take the money approach. If I posted a thread bashing Bizer in the boating forum (look at the top of this page), would he let it stick? Even if true, I'm sure nobody would here my view.
What if Webmaster accidently hopped on the summer bandwagon and sunk his boat? I think it would be too easy or him to pre-censor anything we have to say about his situation.
...
There is a reason our American laws give us so much freedom of speech. I am not trying to legally apply the 1A here, just the principle of it. And that is for hundreds of years, and still now in every country in the world except this one, millions are silenced of their beliefs and opinions by only a handful of people.
Webmaster is trying to be in that handful.
Sure, legally he can do it. He "owns" this forum. And by signing up, we agree to blindly agree to whatever he decides to do with it.
But in this user's opinion, he should stick to mirroring the levels of freedom guaranteed by those much more brilliant than himself (people like our Founding Fathers and SCOTUS justices). Maybe if somebody is really causing a problem, he can ban that user.
XCR, thanks for being a fellow non-sheep.
We're not bad guys, no matter what the Bad Guys say!!