See I don’t agree with that fully. I respect what the mods here are doing trying to keep it the way it is, but I have seen phenomenal posts in here with amazing, well fleshed out responses with facts clearly cited, only to return days later and see the post removed because it wasn’t up to their standards.

Also, academia is a field that unfortunately suffers from human error and human ego. When all your work is founded on the foundations of your predecessors, what happens when something contrary to the historical narrative is discovered? More often than not, there is extreme pushback to anything suggesting someone’s research could possibly be wrong. While I don’t think chat rooms are a good idea, I understand certain people like me that want to be able to ask important questions and not come to a post with 10 responses with all 10 being removed. That in some ways feels like information is being repressed, whether it actually is is an entirely different story. Being a gatekeeper of deeming what is considered “the true story” is a slippery slope.

Trolling? Yes I understand. Instantly remove. Clearly a lacking post? Remove. No effort? Remove. Off topic or making it into any narrative that doesn’t have to do with the post, sure remove it. But I don’t understand removing insightful, lengthy, cited comments sometimes which tends to happen quite frequently here. People in the 1800’s could be considered a historian, a chemist, a philosopher, and more all in 1, but today that’s not possible because we’ve equated PhD to the end game, where all other knowledge in specific fields is somehow considered inferior or not as factual.