Good morning, Crowlee and thanks for the great input. You'll be happy to know that we are springing into action on this.

We originally set-up the "delete" function as a way for HUB leaders to quickly get rid of posts that were simply innocent mistakes (i.e. duplicate posts, posts on wrong boards, etc.).

Deletions based on violations are supposed to go through the violation process for the exact reason you point out.

However, it appears the delete function may be being used as a violation tool.

As such, we are going to make modifications in our next update to rectify this and have all posts go through the violation process. This way, there is a record of every deletion, even the innocent ones.

As far as more accurately defining what will and will not be tolerated, we don't think there is a lot more that can be done. We could write a 20-page manual and there would still be discrepancies. This is especially true when you consider each HUB has its own level of tolerances. Kind of like the "community standard" rule.

At the end of the day, what we are relying on is the judgement of HUB leaders that have been rated by fellow members. We trust they will continue to do a great job of using their authority wisely.

So far, the system is obviously working with more than 10,000,000 pages per month being served and growing. It isn't perfect - but only due to the fact that no system can be perfect. We believe this is as close to perfect as it can get. Too many rules stifles discussion, too few takes it out of control.

As with any democracy, it requires both adherence and tolerance from all members in order to grow and thrive.

The good news here is that we are talking about improving the reporting system, as opposed to the lack of one.

We have all created the best small-cap community ever built on the web. With the input of you and other HUB leaders, it is only going to get better.

Thanks for the input and I look forward to demonstrating the upgrade in our next cycle (3-4 weeks from now).

Regards,
George