Personality squabbles aside, it strikes me that we might be able to make more use of the 'thumbs' for postings.

Whilst NOT suggesting that posters be banned for making unpopular posts (freedom of speech, 1st ammendment etc etc), I feel it would serve the interests of both democracy and the board in general if posters were 'required' to maintain a reasonable level of support for their postings. Posters with consistently negative 'thumbs' could have their number of postings limited to, say, 3-5 per day.

This might encourage everyone to voice their own opinions on the content of a particular post and on the value of the poster with respect to the board in general, with the knowledge that their 'thumb' vote actually has an influence of the structure of this and future discussions.

It would also discourage frivelous overposting, and help to improve the content by making the writer think about the value of what they are publishing before firing the 'submit' button. Those that don't care about content would have their influence gradually diminished until they can excercise their rights of free speech responsibly.

Like I said, no-one should be banned for voicing their opinions (TOS excepted, of course), but collective moderation is likely to be better received and understood that appointed moderation, and would preserve the rights of each individual within the community.

A bit of a pinko suggestion I know, but us Liberals have nothing better to do than organize everyone elses lives..;)