After reading @PdotdQ’s comments and others on the painful amount of noise in the forum, I now strongly support the idea of creating more threads where only vetted users with a track record of constructive and peaceful engagement are allowed to post.
I would also like to add one other comment. I have not been following most of the Behe book review-related threads lately, because of how rapidly the posts proliferate and how most of the posts are short and there is so much noise, even if many of the participants in the threads have solid scientific knowledge. It’s very hard to follow for a non-specialist or someone not participating from the beginning. Thus, for platformed threads involving only scholars and/or high-level users, I think it would be highly beneficial to impose a limited number of posts per day limit for each user in that thread, and possibly a target number of words. In that way, people would be encouraged to think carefully about their replies, and write extended, coherent arguments which focus on concrete ideas instead of personal interactions. The end result would be somewhat more like a written debate that people can more easily follow from the beginning if they want to.
To some extent, the resurrection threads with @vjtorley were closer in this vein (Torley on The Resurrection: Take Two) - because of time, complexity and quantity of ideas, on average each of us would write one or two large posts per day at most. The end result is something that is somewhat Wiki’able (Guide to Alter and Torley on the Resurrection) - of course it was still not 100% ideal, due to the constantly changing topics, but there were several memorable posts that we have referred to when discussing the topic again.
Looking back in my experience on this forum, I have gotten the most personal intellectual benefit out of my participation whenever I write or respond to such extended posts, instead of trying to prove a point against some of the more acerbic commentators here. I think this rule will encourage more higher-level discussion by serious scholars who are not regulars, but here for the ideas, not the personal interactions.
EDIT: a good example of an extended written debate is the one held on the pages of PSCF regarding the RATE project and the age of the Earth.
EDIT 2: @Timothy_Horton’s one-sentence reply to my post is a good example of what I think contributes to the noise here, and prevents more thoughtful, patient scholars from participating more often. Instead of a substantial reply, he simply accuses me of censorship - no substantiation, no explanation. But imagine if that post is the only one he were allowed to post on the thread for today. Surely, he would reconsider whether his single post would be devoted to an unsubstantiated accusation of censorship or maybe more extended thoughts about forum reorganization.