I don't think there should be any moderation until lives are threatened. If the discussions, whether its the 'chain reaction' type thing or not, get a popular response then it's relevant to the members. And if a discussion turns nasty then people should have the common sense, and the right, to ignore it.
If you expect every member to give serious thought to everything they were considering posting about then they'll probably end up not bothering, and in turn you'll just end up with no variety or personality in what does get discussed. I mean seriously, has it really come down to 'we only want people to discuss what the moderators feel is relevant?' How the hell is anyone supposed to second guess that?!? Maybe that's not what you're saying but that's how it reads to me.
I mean sure, the moderators do a good job and I'm certainly not trying to 'stir shit up' but after reading all these responses it just makes me wonder where all this is headed. As I said, I'm not making light of the hard work the moderators put into this but I'm sure the bad apples can have their account suspended if they are blatantly causing trouble? I may have used some harsh words on someone myself a couple of weeks ago, but that was only because I felt that they were bullying the person who started a thread asking what I felt to be a pretty legitimate question [that discussion was one of the ones that was shut down].
Ultimately I think this is being taken far too seriously and it is only going to make people less sociable. Which is pretty dumb for a 'social' network. I just want to state once again that I'm not stirring shit up. I'm just trying to put my perspective on the situation.