Scott, this is your forum and you can, of course, run it as you see fit. No one would argue with that. It is indeed generous of you and anyone who expends money and time for a public forum to do so. However, this is a common sense appeal to you that I feel many others here would support.
Your forum has the most restrictive rules I have encountered in quite some time. For example, I haven’t seen a forum where one is not permitted to edit one’s own posts since the advent of such forums in the old Prodigy days when such wasn’t technically possible yet. Some forums place a reasonable time limit on editing while others allow unlimited editing without having experienced any catastrophic results that I have ever heard of. Most people who wish to edit simply want to fix typos. Most people don’t have the luxury of a second pair of eyes which is invaluable in proofreading because as one knows what one intended to type one has a tendency to glance over typos or hasty mistakes such as “there” for “their” or “you” for “your,” (a very common typographical error) and many place an overreliance on spell check functions when typing offline and then pasting online. Therefore, one often doesn’t always catch mistakes the first time around. I would think that you would rather not have sloppy posts on your forum, and for the life of me I don’t know what your trepidation is with allowing your posters to edit their own posts.
Secondly, and even more irksome, your policy of moderators having to approve new posts and even replies (I’m uncertain if this is for or everyone or just newer members for a period of time) to existing posts severely disrupts back and forth discussions. Sometimes, one has to wait hours for one’s reply to show up on a topic and hours more for a response. This makes continuity of thought difficult and It is totally disruptive. It is not difficult to judge the attention to propriety of a new poster after just a few posts, especially with this forum’s subject matter.
What is most perplexing is that I’m uncertain what your apprehension is when just about every other forum with any subject focus does not have these restrictions, even ones with such volatile subject matters as politics. Do you really think people who would be attracted to a forum such as yours in which the vocabulary includes: “existentialism”; “metaphysical”; “relativity”’ “ontological”; and with such luminaries discussed as: Descartes; Spinoza; Kant; and Sarte require a greater degree of shepherding than people who disuses Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton or Tom Brady and Collin Kaepernick?
Scott, this could be a truly splendid forum, but I feel your over-moderating is chasing away many people who have other options on the subject of philosophy and will go elsewhere to post. My post of yesterday has all of fourteen views so far, five of which are probably my own. Please rethink these matters for the benefit of your own forum and of all.
Thank you for your consideration.