One criticism that has been brought up of paleohacks is that participants act nasty.
Theoretically, paleohacks is a cross-section of paleo people who use the internet. There are almost 5,000 users. In a given sample of 5,000 people, anywhere, you'll find some very nice people and some jerks.
You will also find varying opinions of hot-button issues. What seems jerky to someone might seem like the truth to others.
So, my question for you nasty boys and girls is...do you find paleohacks to be more nasty than other internet forums? Personally, I find people here to be fairly clever and analytical, but not always. There are jerks and trolls for sure, along with some insanely helpful members who write out long answers to help paleo newbies at the drop of a hat. The concept of "paleo" has fragmented into many different, sometimes conflicting ideas in the past couple years. Conflict in discussion is bound to arise, but as moderators, we want to make sure it's not completely out of control.
Please do keep in mind that there are different paradigms that can be used in moderation. What is moderation but governance, and what topic is more hotly debated than how to govern (aka politics)? You can't please everyone all the time, but hopefully you can please most of the people most of the time, or something like that. Or is it fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on...you?