No way. There have only been a couple of banned posters in the history of this forum. The old-timers can probably guess who they were and would agree it was necessary. It was only after MANY warnings.

Look around at some of the other posters you can't stand. If we let them stay we must be very tolerant. :rofl:

no, I think that only the moderators should be allowed to ban people

Remember: "They also serve who only serve as a bad example." :grin:

After many of the posts that have been made around here lately, I have a better answer to this question so I am reviving this old thread. Members should not have the power to ban other members.

However, a member should have the option to ban themself. Some of these posters are so crazy that they just might actually do it and spare us all from seeing any more of their posts. Let's get this option added asap!!

lets try and think of the people banned so far from this site......

TUWho - definately
Cottonbowl66 - most likely

those are the only two that come to mind. there was a large group of guys when i first joined that ran the free speech alley, but when TUWho left, so did they.

nobody should be banned here unless it is blatant or people are talking about other people's mammas.

A member seach for TUWho comes up "no matches" and we know for sure he was banned. A search for cottonbowl'66 shows he is still a member. I prefer to think that cottonbowel stopped posting because his computer was stolen by a member of a minority group or one of his fellow liberals.

Only Mr. Peabody should be given this power to wield like a battle sword of honor.

Sabanfan would you have banned me for the complimentary remarks I made twords Notre Dame?

ONLY if I get to carry a pitchfork and torch when we turn into a mob and go to ban someone. :thumb:

Of course not. Committed maybe, but not banned.