Mods should work to prevent and sanction personal attacks.

RebuttalsR1. We have absolutely no idea what Juggle's intentions are.We did not join this site as shareholders or stakeholders in what we understand to be the conglomerate that owns it. Debate-dot-org is a proprietary Internet location (website), and accordingly, is intellectual the property of Juggle. But, this does not make any suggestions whatsoever as to what mechanism this location, or what Juggle has sustained here, serves for Juggle as an organization. As you'll see here: http://www.juggle.com... began by providing "structured, comparable information on a plethora of topics." They basically paid people to create copy that they sold to others to, perhaps, improve their websites or whatever and whallah -- they started catching on. This aligns neatly with what Debate-dot-org tends to be. However, to our knowledge, Juggle has not used the information we publish on this site in any proprietary way. Indeed, we are even free of advertisements. Mysteriously existing autonomously and with completely sovereignty, we are enjoying a sort of free and genuine stream of thought, that aught not be bastardized by stringent parameters and strict reactions.R2. Making money for this site is not the responsibility, or even in the interest, of its members. As neither shareholders, nor stockholders, nor under any written, verbal, or implied agreement that we would act in the interests of Juggle, or its financial stability, there is no interest in the members of this website to bear any concern for the profitability of Juggle when posting material on this site. At most, we are compelled by law to refrain from damaging the company's image or profitability, which, within the scope of interacting on this website, is essentially impossible to determine. Ultimately, it should be acknowledged that the opinions expressed here do not reflect Juggle as a company in any way, and thus, the interests of Juggle are irrelevant in kind. It is therefore best to leave harsh reactions to severe circumstances, such as spamming, unrelenting harrassment, breaches of local or federal law, or posting pornography. Not minor squabbles.R3. DDO is not the only one of its kind.Although my opponent presented good reasons as to why one would like to have access to a website like Debate-dot-org, the fact is that this website is not the only one of its kind. In fact, there are several websites on which any member of this website can experience many, if not all, of the benefits of interacting with the people here at Debate-dot-org.Don't get me wrong. i don't think that the misconduct should be condoned. All I'm saying is that it is inevitable; don't you think it would be boring without the occassional harmless personal attack? R4. The Terms of Service for proper conduct on this site is historically subject to selective application on an as-needed basis.The Terms of Service is not a viable argument, as it is only selectively applied to maintain order, rather than ubiquitously and pedantically applied in order to maintain authority. R5. In accordance with your assertions that (1) it is fact that members of this site has chosen to agree to utilize this free service on a noncompulsory nature, rendering individual opinions irrelevant; (2) members are welcome to join other sites if they do not enjoy their time here; and (3) Juggle has no obligation to even approach minor disputes, ...it is completely fallacious to have any sort of reactionary measures result from WriterDave's requests, which were made under the assumption that, at the very least, Juggle has a vested interest in what is ultimately the opinion of a single member, with a handful of supporters. ArgumentsA1. The power you give one person or a few people is proportionate to the amount of power you remove from the website at large.In supporting the active censureship and penalization for petty exchanges removes control of how the people on this website can express themselves. That can result in stifled opinions and otherwise insightful conversations curtailed due to what may eventually be a misjudgement by an incompetent moderator.Innomen is not going to be who he is forever. No matter how long he serves as President, Mod, King, God, Buddha, and Jesus, eventually, there's going to be the day when he's like, "Okay, kids, this is ______, I'm going to go do something else, now." And, ultimately, that wil happen again and again, and eventually, as the probability goes up with each cycle, there will be someone that we will not want to have the sort of power we are so open to giving Innomen. A2. The responsibilty should not rest on the moderators to ensure the forums maintain a semblance of what is ultimately an abstraction.It is impossible to maintain a completely unoffensive environment and the free expression of ideas simultaneously. People in the religion forum, for example, take everything to heart and personally, as they are discussing something they base their lifestyle around to some degree. Therefore, many arguments are considered personal attacks, and often offensive, whether or not it was intended in religious discussions. Under such authority, where a moderator or a team of moderators actively police the forum to maintain some censored and muted version of everyone's knowledge and opinions, the religion forum would have to be completely eradicated.A3. The nature of debate is opposition.in fact, the very nature of debate is opposition of one's opinions. Therefore, one way or another, you are most often going to be verbally attacking something in your statement or response to whatever was initially posted. For example, in the previous section of this response, I attacked each of your primary arguments, and presented my own. That is the nature of debate.Some of these attacks are bound to become personal to a degree, and it should not warrant any sort of extraordinary response by moderators nor members.A4. This website has proven capable of moderating itself to a degree.Although there are those that have blatantly breached the terms of service and threatened order within the forum or debate sections of this website and were thus banned, the majority of general misconduct has gone completely unapproached throughout my stay here. However, those that committed this misconduct were often shunned, and thereafter incurred difficulty getting attention and participating in threads. Such people even received negative criticism, which mounted to the degree that they decided to leave on their own cognizance. Accordingly, this website can even moderate itself to a degree, which negates the need for an active censureship of what is posted.