As a member for the past 2 years, posting with a minority opinion, I can state with 100% conviction that minority opinions are not moderated because of a minority opinion. I always try to keep my posts respectful, as free from snark as humanly possible, and as much as possible on the topic of the thread. When I state something as fact, I will usually back the statement up with a link as to why I believe it is a fact. I can also state with 100% conviction that when you post from the minority, you do meet resistance and others rarely agree with your post LOL

.
One thing that has changed quite a bit since the trial first began is that before the trial, most posters used links to back up their opinions or statements of fact. As the trial progressed, and the evidence was shown in the trial, links were used less and less, because it was now in evidence as opposed to in the docs. Post verdict, links now are used mostly for pointing to new news stories about this case. However, in the threads, most no longer back up their statements of fact with links. Immediately after the verdict, well, there was quite a bit of leeway given by the moderators (understandably so), due to emotions running very, very high. Thank you mods for your understanding. Emotions have calmed considerably.
As a poster from the minority, I am used to seeing my posts met with resistance. What i am not used to seeing is majority opinion posters disagreeing with each other, and I have seen a whole lot more of that in the past few weeks, than I have in the last 2 years. What is really surprising to me is the uncharacteristic, for lack of a better word, bickering. I have a theory as to why this may be happening:
Before the verdict, things were basically divided into two categories, opinions that leaned towards guilt (majority), opinions that leaned towards not guilty (minority). Now, however, the thread topics are not so cut and dried. JA's book, BRACE, state motion to recover investigative costs, Casey's life after trial, who will make the most money, RK suing LP, RK suing NE, GA and CA in NC, are all subjects that have little to do with whether or not KC is guilty or not guilty, so the majority and minority lines have all but disappeared. Someone who absolutely believes KC is guilty of all charges, may not like the idea of JA writing a book so soon after the verdict. Someone else who believes KC is guilty of all charges may love the idea of JA's new book, and can't understand why anyone would not want to hear what JA had to say. The current threads being discussed are open to a wider spread of opinions, and this has led to many more disagreements than back when it was just G or NG. It was much easier when ya'll could just look for old TDA's posts, skip over it and totally agree with everyone else LOL.
I enjoy WS, and I feel a comraderie with the other posters here. I have read posts that made me laugh, posts that made me cry, and posts that made me laugh so hard I cried.
I have enjoyed many spirited debates the last two years, with a large number of posters. More often than not, the end result was agreeing to disagree, but the discussions were thought provoking and informative. I know for a fact, we can discuss a subject, totally disagree with each other, and still respect one another. It really is as simple as that age old rule "treat others as you would like others to treat you."