Reading the arguments on both sides, the main argument for [The authors right...] is that we are human, make mistakes and have the right to change our minds. This would seemed to be supported by someone (see:Rule 2) held in high regard around here.
The main argument against (ignoring the rather confuted "Stalinist revision of history"), would seem to be that it serves as a deterrent to those that might "post in haste" and as punishment for those that do.
Foregoing any discussions that covers old ground of PM not being a democracy, given that it is a community, and that most
" Western societies have abandoned all of the once-popular forms of public punishment and humiliation. The original Puritan "scarlet letter" was a punishment abandoned 200 years before Hawthorne described it in his 1858 novel of the same name. Similarly, the pillory, stocks and ducking chair have gone the way of the history books."
, this form of
would seem to contravene
a certain, well regarded constitution
as well as
the odd convention
Precedent for citation of Law in Monks 'internal affairs'