Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Totally agree with Jeff. Recent topics has been an Ebola-fest lately and it's getting ridiculous.

+1. I'm glad to see the new threads being locked and posters directed to the main ebola thread.

+2

Too many rumors, too many double, triple posts. Too many over-reactions. Too much jumping-the-gun. I understand some people are terrified about ebola, but discussion is best kept limited in one place/post. It's actually better organized that way for people who are really into the topic.

+3. I agree with +2.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Totally agree with Jeff. Recent topics has been an Ebola-fest lately and it's getting ridiculous.

+1. I'm glad to see the new threads being locked and posters directed to the main ebola thread.

+2

Too many rumors, too many double, triple posts. Too many over-reactions. Too much jumping-the-gun. I understand some people are terrified about ebola, but discussion is best kept limited in one place/post. It's actually better organized that way for people who are really into the topic.

Anonymous wrote:Totally agree with Jeff. Recent topics has been an Ebola-fest lately and it's getting ridiculous.

+1. I'm glad to see the new threads being locked and posters directed to the main ebola thread.

Totally agree with Jeff. Recent topics has been an Ebola-fest lately and it's getting ridiculous.

This is not ebola. This is Fearbola.

OP here. I enjoy your website, I frequent often and help others when I can, but respectfully disagree. Thank you for your quick response.

There are nine threads with "ebola" in their subject line on the first page of the health forum. Plus there are a couple more ebola threads that don't mention ebola in their subjects. There is at least one in the Political forum. There even one in the money forum. There is one in the website feedback forum. So, I have to disagree with your assessment that I am only allowing one thread.

Today alone, one of the nurses from Texas is being moved to NIH. The inmate in Loudon was taken to the hospital. The DC Health Director held a press conference in which he said 12 patients in DC have presented with ebola-like symptoms (all tested negative and were released). Do all of these need threads? The guy in Loudon hasn't even tested positive yet. Can you imagine if we had 12 threads for each of those DC cases?

If there is a real threat, I will happily have a thread devoted to it. But, we simply can't have a new thread for every mention of "ebola" that comes across someone's Twitter feed.

thread=threat

I am glad Jeff is not trying to be "impartial", but using common sense.

Ebola is NOT a thread, no need to be hysterical and swamp dcurbanmom

I love this website, but some people come to this forum for quick information about the Ebola situation. I think the fact you are insisting upon one thread is unreasonable. There are many aspects to this issue...and the fact a person in loudoun is being tested for Ebola is very relevant info that shouldn't be buried amongst 24 pages of thread. I say this respectfully, but feel you are managing this forum and issue with an iron hand. You've made several statements containing your stance on this board that people are being hysterical...and I feel your opinion is coloring your management of this issue and influencing people's ability to communicate openly on this topic. As moderator of this site, whether it's public or not, you should strive to be somewhat impartial in your responses and management of the site...and perhaps share your views under a different username.