The prehistory of this forum runs through alt.coffee, an unmoderated usenet forum and Coffeegeek, a strongly moderated forum where a high level of civility is enforced. HB is trying to steer a middle course between these two poles. But what exactly is this middle course?

There are several members here who have experience in all these fora; but I am not speaking for them, nor am I speaking in an official capacity for HB, but I would like to speak personally about the middle course I want to see as a member and that guides me as moderator.

Discussions can get heated for three reasons; and each has its own middle course.

The first are outright trolls who use personal attacks and are entirely inconsistent in their opinions and knowledge. Trolls often pose as skeptics, but there is a difference between asking for proof, or pointing out the poster has no proof; and telling posters they are idiots. Skeptics can be a pita; but they are essential, since they prevent a forum from floating off into cloud cuckoo land. Trolls, on the other hand, should be banned quickly. An unmoderated forum like alt.coffee cannot get rid of trolls. A polite forum like Coffeegeek often gets rid of pita skeptics too. We try to make the distinction.

The second is the fight between fans of a particular piece of gear and those who have had bad experiences with it. I believe the current spate of locked threads are mostly of this kind. The truth is that everything breaks, and every brand has lemons. The other truth is that the problem with most bad espresso is on the human side of the portafilter. The middle course is to be aware that either is a possibility.

We have some spectacularly good and patient troubleshooters; so in most cases, complaint and problem threads are resolved amicably and accurately. The problem arises with gear that attracts both a strong following of fans, and of wannabe fans who have entirely unreasonable expectations. Their arguments degenerates quickly into a caffeinated version of perfectionism and recrimination. The good news here is by the time members get to their second or third machine, they stop buying a slice of perfection and start buying actual coffee gear. It is also useful to note those vendors who actively promote very high expectations while attacking those who haven't fulfilled them.

The third is arguments about techniques, quality and taste. I personally like these arguments, since I think they get to the heart of what the forum is about. My opinion is there are two extremes to avoid. The first is that all taste, quality and technique is subjective. The second is that whatever I am defending has decades (or centuries, millennia, and deep time) levels of collective experience to support it (OK, I admit I'm partial to this argument on occasion). The middle way in an argument about technique or quality is to stipulate what kinds of evidence are persuasive. If no agreement on the kinds of relevant evidence can be reached; it seems likely the argument is not well framed.

Actual posting rules have to be much more specific and definite than this; but, at least for me, the point of the rules is always to achieve balanced and useful discussion.