I think it is entirely appropriate to lock threads where posters have resorted to this tactic when logic fails them.
I agree with this completely. The problem, tough, is recognizing the difference between discussion and personal attacks.
Let's take American Idol...
Simon Cowell tells a singer, "Sweetheart, you're tone deaf. That was dreadful."
That's an honest assesment...especially if the person really IS tone deaf. It's not an attack, but actual criticism of a situation. Of course, it always helps to give words of encouragment or something positive in addition...but we often forget to do that.
Now, Simon tells another singer, "You remind me of those little animals in the forest...what do you call them...bushbabies?"
Well...okay,
that's a bit of an attack because even though he's a terrible singer, Simon resorted to commenting on his physical appearance.
(in this case...the resemblance
was quite remarkble to a bush baby...but it was rude nonetheless and he really shouldn't have said that)
I guess I have yet to see these healthy flame wars. So far, there's been nothing productive coming out of a flame war or antagonistic and aggressive debate.
I have. Not here...but I have seen many of them. One of the reasons they don't happen here is because threads are locked too early and it becomes like the squashed bug. Also, it's because some of the people with the locking powers use it for their own benefit rather than adressig the issue (no not just recently...I'vve seen this several times over the last few months...different people).
The healthy ones I've seen often get kind of nasty...but eventually come to an end with mutual respect or understanding. SUre, they can be difficult to follow..but sometimes it's best to leave them alone...or, as a moderator, keep the discussion on track...deleteing just the
truly insulting comments rather than locking the enitre thread.
I think people should resect each others feelings.
Unfortunately, that's become a really politically correct cliche that people constantly misinterpret. 'Respect' is something that is earned...Deference and courteousness what people really mean there.
Example: I have absolutely no respect for a certain political figure. I happen to totally disagree with her politics and her methods of doing things. However, because she's an elected official, and people elected her...I should be courteous to her when we interact and show deference to her opinions. I don't have to agree with her...and I can certainly argue the merits of her position, even in a heated manner, without insulting her or "respecting" her.
Now, if I call her a shrew...as I am oft wanting to do...that's just not really nice of me.