You haven't known this, but i kept discussing the Philips SOX as well as one other lamp factory (GLS lamps) purchase with James in private communication, long after that post. The GLS subject went as far as establishing contacts with people of the factory and finding out information about the equipment offered including it's required floor space and costs. While i haven't gone further with it and the equipment ended up being split up and bought by others, i brought the information acquired as a reference for the SOX discussion

Ash, despite what you think we did not ask the moderators to close down your threads, the fact that it happened straight after we had posted is coincidence, nothing more.
This site as most others are is not a democracy. The moderators have carte blanche to close down threads that they don't like, and there is nothing you can do about it.
If you don't agree with their decision then you must either suffer in silence or leave the site.
Re-opening a topic after it has just been closed down is not going to win you any friends.

Moderators don't act randomly out of nowhere. They act either when a breach of forum rules happens - which haven't happened in any of the discussions, or when members are complaining

The latter is what i am trying to figure out. There is no connection between not getting inline with anyone's opinions (/advice) to having to close the discussions. I asked if there is something else. In light of the answers received, it appears to not be - It's ultimately going against their opinion by itself, that they viewed as grounds to require the discussion to be stopped

This is not acceptable on any level since it means that anyone can be silenced if somebody else complains about not agreeing with them. It's nothing to do with democracy, but much to do with showing kindergarten-level maturity and utter intolerance



The conclusion is, that there were no grounds for destroying or closing the discussions. The faults were :

 - On the side of members who acted to destroy, ask to stop, complain to the moderators, etc. about the discussions, instead of - as admitted by everyone being the right thing in both follow-ups - parting ways with the discussion and letting it continue without their participation

 - On the side of the moderators for acting to close the discussions, instead of acting to calm down the members who viewed disagreement with their opinion as an offense and complained. This is one of the duties of a moderator, to act in moderation. Sometimes it takes replying peacefully to members, and not rushing to use administrative previleges on the slightest complaint



Is it clear that we can, from now on :

 - Discuss everything with confidence, even when we don't go inline with somebody's opinion or advice ?

 - Not destroy or elsewhere interrupt discussions which go against our opinions ? - Coming to the discussion with an opposing opinion is good. Forcing it in a way that destroys the discussion or involves the moderators is bad

 - Realise that we aren't forced to stay in any discussion we get fed up with ?

Ash, we are just site members like yourself. I promise you that we did not complain to the admins about any of your posts. Believe that or not, as you choose. If you have a problem with an administrator's decision, take it up with them direct. Continually going on about it on the open forum will get you nowhere.

It isn't the administrators, who initially came to the thinking that the discussion must be stopped. It was members like yourself, others who participated in this discussion, and even more others who actually complained but coming to explain what was the issue is not up to them. It's only the administrative actions themselves, that have anything to do with administrators, and that will be discussed with the administrators separately

Who participated here have provided sufficient answers to what made them want to stop the discussion. Who haven't participated - cannot be heard. The answers dont justify what happened, but they are clear

What i am asking is

Is it clear that we can, from now on :

 - Discuss everything with confidence, even when we don't go inline with somebody's opinion or advice ?

 - Not destroy or elsewhere interrupt discussions which go against our opinions ? - Coming to the discussion with an opposing opinion is good. Forcing it in a way that destroys the discussion or involves the moderators is bad

 - Realise that we aren't forced to stay in any discussion we get fed up with ?