Internet Forum.

(Excerpts)

Troll
Forum trolls are users that repeatedly and deliberately breach the netiquette of an established online community, posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages to bait or excite users into responding or to test the forum rules and policies, and with that the patience of the forum staff. Their provocative behavior may potentially start flame wars (see below) or other disturbances. Responding to a troll's provocations is commonly known as 'feeding the troll' and is generally discouraged, as it can encourage their disruptive behavior.

Moderators
The moderators  are users (or employees) of the forum who are granted access to the posts and threads of all members for the purpose of moderating discussion (similar to arbitration) and also keeping the forum clean (neutralizing spam and spambots etc.). Moderators also answer users' concerns about the forum, general questions, as well as respond to specific complaints. Common privileges of moderators include: deleting, merging, moving, and splitting of posts and threads, locking, renaming, stickying of threads, banning, suspending, unsuspending, unbanning, warning the members, or adding, editing, removing the polls of threads.

Essentially, it is the duty of the moderator to manage the day-to-day affairs of a forum or board as it applies to the stream of user contributions and interactions. The relative effectiveness of this user management directly impacts the quality of a forum in general, its appeal, and its usefulness as a community of interrelated users.

Offending content is usually deleted. Sometimes if the topic is considered the source of the problem, it is locked; often a poster may request a topic expected to draw problems to be locked as well, although the moderators decide whether to grant it. In a locked thread, members cannot post anymore. In cases where the topic is considered a breach of rules it – with all of its posts – may be deleted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_forum

The NYT endorsing Kasich is basically a non-story.  Except for maybe northeast Republicans, the rest of the country could care less, because the NYT is decidedly liberal.

For example, in the general election they haven't endorsed a Republican since Eisenhower in 1956.  It really isn't hard to see why most Republicans have little to no respect for them.

Brady Bunch wrote:

The NYT endorsing Kasich is basically a non-story.  Except for maybe northeast Republicans, the rest of the country could care less, because the NYT is decidedly liberal.

For example, in the general election they haven't endorsed a Republican since Eisenhower in 1956.  It really isn't hard to see why most Republicans have little to no respect for them.

Agree, to an extent.
However, there are a lot of blue state republicans in those northeast states. And they provide a lot of money to the party. The importance of northeast republicans goes beyond electoral votes.
 

Goose wrote:

That's fine.
Moderating an internet forum is challenging.
You have chosen, for months now to go to war with a moderator.
You have passed up on no opportunity to personally attack, belittle, and show contempt for the moderator.
You have derailed threads as part of your personal vendetta.
I have let you get away with murder here.

 

STOP DELETING POST JUST BECAUSE YOU DON"T AGREE WITH THEM! 
You are abusing your authority as a moderator.
 

Brady Bunch wrote:

The NYT endorsing Kasich is basically a non-story.  Except for maybe northeast Republicans, the rest of the country could care less, because the NYT is decidedly liberal.

For example, in the general election they haven't endorsed a Republican since Eisenhower in 1956.  It really isn't hard to see why most Republicans have little to no respect for them.

Well, then most republicans are missing out on something.
Sure, the NYT editorial board has a decidedly progressive slant. I don't deny it.

However, let me offer this.

1. The NYT is also a top notch news source, with some of the best writing in the country.

2. The opinion page has a strong liberal presence. But those writers are accomplished. For instance, Paul Krugman writes often about economics. He has a Nobel prize in economics.  Thomas Friedman is a three time Pulitzer prize winner.

3. The NYT employs outstanding conservative writers (Brooks and Douthat) who appear several times a week.

4. There is a breadth of opinion presented on the op-ed page. Scan their archives and you will see articles authored by Newt Gingrich. Rudy Guiliani, Mitt Romney, Rand Paul, Donald Rumsfeld, et al. How many conservative sites cited here on the exchange as sources grant that type of presence to the other side of the argument?

Hey, maybe the Kasich endorsement is a nonstory. But, I would not say that the NYT deserves no respect.
JMO