Contrary to bjwhite, we're actually interested in listening. He dissed the sale corner threads, but we didn't have to do that, instead we put some effort and analysis into thinking about how to help the hobbyist/collector while still working within the limitations of some mandated requirements. Maybe the hobbyists/collectors should speak up as if we listen to just bjwhite, right now those threads are a silly and a wasted effort, not worth the time to have done it, and we should just delete them. And no, restoring unlimited items in individual subscriptions is not an option, bjwhite can ***** all he wants on that, but that's one of the mandates. However, listening requires that what is offered is actually pertinent to the requirements of the situation and not just a wish that things would revert to what they were. I've tried to explain the various factors that contributed to these 10-20% changes, but some users don't seem to have actually read the explanations or ignored them. One example being that the 2018 rules allowed sellers to move an unlimited number and value of inventory for $15. That is unacceptable and until users incorporate that into their suggestions, they're not going to gain much traction with any input or comments. BTW - you can generally thank a handful of users for a number of these rules changes over time. The site started with loose rules and a laissez-faire attitude; then the user that posted 430+ sale threads in a couple of years came along or there was the user that posted $250K in wheels and claimed he was a hobbyist, both with $15 subscriptions. If users didn't push the rules to such an outrageous extent, we wouldn't have much reason to be changing them. As usual a few ruin it for everyone else. Let's get to your moderation workload point, so I can explain something that hasn't been explained before. You're right that many people ignore the rules about commentary, but there are actually 3 distinct choices here: 1) Go back to the way it was, where the ads are just like the forums, any comments, positive or negative, are allowed. This is the natural behavior of users who don't read the rules, i.e. the reversion state when there's no moderation. Moderators had an easy time, but sellers hated it and bitched about it until we instituted the commentary rules of 6/2015. That's what started this, listening to the sellers. 2) Because the commentary rules of 6/2015 are a miserable ***** to moderate, even if the sellers are happier. We would love to reduce this workload. From the moderators point of view, it is just as hard to moderate only negative comments as it is to moderate both postive and negative comments. Very little difference, either way we're reading the ad thread post by post and making judgements about what's opinion, deleting posts, and sending warnings. So what you're missing is we're already spending "hours and hours" being miserable and that's roughly similar under either standard. What we're looking for is that reducing the fluff and opinion content overall in the threads will make ads more "to the point" and easier to moderate. But even then, it's still going to be miserable. You're welcome. 3) Then there's just locking the thread, or disallowing replies, as you mention at the end. Very static, buyers don't get to comment, ask questions or submit info. Sellers would have less visibility into how many views were actually generated and would have to repeat answers PM by PM. Buyers would only be able to contact sellers by PM and the seller could tell buyers different things. Seems like sellers and buyers would both hate that, though it makes the moderator's life very, very easy. (The admins lives are a little harder for a while, as they have to figure out how to restructure that part of the forum to allow this locking feature). How about it? Do you think users would like to go back to #1 or move to #3? Works for me, because some of the users complaining here seem oblivious to how much mod work the 2018 commentary rules they want restored actually takes. I personally prefer #1 because it's both fair and takes little work, all we have to moderate for is personal attacks, which is almost always just one or two posts and reported to us by the offended party; that's a slam dunk.