dimmest bulb in the darkest part of the universe:
It's a matter of simple decorum and a basic respect. I know you like metaphors but today I'll use a few similes instead. I hope that it's close relation to metaphor allows you to wrap your remaining brain cells around the idea I'm expressing.
The forum is like a big public convention center. Sub-forums within the main structure are like the big rooms hosting various conventioneers interested in the subject within. Inside these big rooms are a variety of vendor booths related to the subject of the room. You won't find computer vendors in the travel sub-forum; they're in the travel-related room. Amongst the vendor booths you find one one that you think interests you and you cross the cordon to participate. But once inside the Macintosh booth all you do is ask questions about why WinDoZE 7 sucks rocks. The Macintosh vendor asks you to leave. Do you?
Of course you don't. Why? Because you don't understand why he wants you to leave?
You see ... in the above example I'm the Macintosh Vendor. At other times, I'm just another convention attendee. In those cases, when I walk into the Sony booth and hear you asking them why WInDOzE 7 sucks rocks, I can easily turn around and leave. Sometimes, I'll laugh out loud at you or tell you to shut up but it's my responsibility to leave when I don't want to see you. Since, I'm hosting this booth though it's my responsibility to participate in the discussion I started.
Unfortunately, the convention center manager doesn't have enough time to identify the all the smelly folks that enter his building. There are just too many of them and some of them emit a much fouler odor than you. It's just that in this case I really hate the smell of sophistry.
Your obstinate insistence and failure to comprehend the purpose of decorum in a public place though ensure this is the last sentence I'll type in this thread.
1) I don't think the points I've posted on this thread are sophist. I think they have to do with the basic relationship between form and content of gene sequence transcription. I do see why this is slightly less on-point that you're desired ethical conversation about whether there is some wrong with patenting genes, assuming it can be done. Still, I think the fact that anyone could patent/copyright anything by lying about what it actually is or represents is itself an aspect of the ethics.
2) There is a difference between a room of people talking and a thread of posts in an online forum. In fact there are a number of differences, all significant to whether someone should be asked to "leave" by not posting. They are:
a. sound in a room drowns out other sound or makes it more difficult to hear another person speaking. One post on a thread doesn't interfere with the ability to read another post.
b. in oral speaking/discussions, turn-taking takes time. The more people speak, the more time is used/lost in a particular discussion-session. an online discussion thread is neither time limited, nor are readers required to alot time to reading any threads they consider a waste of their time.
c. in a convention center or similar physical venue, rooms are rented and limited so that planning is necessary to alot a certain speaker or topic limited room-availability and time. In this forum, you don't pay to start a thread and you can start as many threads as you want. So spending your thread discussions making a case for why certain posters should exclude themselves from your thread is more self-gratification on your part than it is necessary police action for yourself or others posting on "your thread."
3) A bad conventioneer does what you're doing when someone's comment or question is off-topic. They attack the person posting to humiliate them and create some humor or a sense of superiority for other people in the room at the one participant's expense. A good discussion-leader, on the other hand, explains why they see the discussant's comments or questions as related, but then adds why the particular discussion is meant to be focussed on a slightly different set of issues, and suggests that if the discussant is truly interested in the other topic they should start another thread and only use the current thread to add to the intended topic.
Is it too much to ask that you would have clarified the topic you wanted to address in this thread and then welcomed me to discuss THAT topic specifically instead of insulting me, asking me to self-censor, and then posting a sarcastic poll about banning me? I appreciate the humor of this, but it comes at my expense and I only wonder if you would appreciate the same humor taken at yours.