It pains me when threads are reduced to threats by moderators & staff. This is not to say that such warnings, at the time given, are not unwarranted, only that such warnings are often given after exchanges with several well-known members, moderators, etc. who have engaged in the substance of the discussion before calling an end to the conversation.
Moderate, or take a side—don’t try to do both. There’s precoius enough trust before someone claims to have a strong opinion, then starts picking at language, spelling, etc. That’s a part foul, at least.
And from the inside — it probably looks and feels like bullying by selective application of the rules — while simultaneously negating and ignoring the substance of the “offender’s” complaint, claim, etc. “You’re wrong —and don’t talk back” is not an answer anyone takes well.
I suggest that a moderator be assigned to or select every thread before participating or forming an opinion, and let that moderator moderate according to a short list of notions of how we all want to be treated, and apply those notions to all posts equally, and not participate in the discussion —at all.
I think it would save a lot of feelings, and I don’t get any joy out of seeing people getting frustrated and angry when they started out with poorly informed opinion and not enough resources to understand what they would need to know to make a better decision.
Some people don’t make sense. Some use talk-to-text and don’t know how to read at a functional level —-or spell well enough to indentify homonyms.
Anyway — I’m sure you guys will figure it out. Best of luck!