Ok thanks for the clarification. Yes, I read the warning from the mods to Archaic in late March. Did you notice the WHY of the warning? Here it is......"Put simply, your POV creates a buttload of trouble and unrest, that quite frankly, we don't need." Now I'm just guessing and mods correct me if my guess is off course but what do you suppose the mod means by buttload of trouble and unrest? My take is they receive a lot of emails concerning Archaic's posts, increased mod actions such as warnings and such?
So my take on this is part of the trouble and unrest isn't the actual POV but the REACTION from others on the forum who email the mods with their disapproval or make such a case of it on GV. Here is why I believe this is the case. The mod in the warning continues...
"As I have said repeatedly here over the past couple of weeks, the community comes first.
Your opinions are waaaaay down the list, I'm afraid."
From these statements by the mod I assume that part of the action against Archaic resulted from the trouble and unrest created by others in the community.
Now I have to ask why is one persons view resulting in so much trouble and unrest? I don't think it is his view. After all its just his view. We all have them. What makes his more terrible or powerful than anyone else's view? I think its his support of his view which creates the problem. Archaic supports his view very well.
Its his successful support of his view which in my opinion is the WHY a group inside the community is actively acting behind the scene and on the forum against him. And yes I believe the purpose is to have him censored or banned. Which raises the question, if true? Is it possible that absent this groups actions the trouble and unrest go away?
For example here is a quote from your latest post....
"Mind you of course I’m not biased for Archaic and do not engage him anymore but I do take issue with someone who responds to being ignored with a graphic picture of the victim of the violence he is obsessively fixated on with the demand that we take his issue more seriously."
You state your not biased yet you make this statement even though it was the mods who allowed the photo to remain not Archaic. Do you see the bias in this statement? Yes he posted the photo but the mods allowed it to remain. Why blame him for the mods decision? Sorry but this appears to be the result of bias. It shows a prejudice.
As far as soapboxing. I would like to see the definition which is being used when people use this term.
Is providing one picture considered soapboxing?