While Historical Research sticks more closely to the actual facts themselves, it seems appropriate to have an area where these things can be discussed more broadly. Where we can speculate
That seems simple enough - and fair enough.
People who want to maintain the high standards of historical research should be allowed to have their own forum, and not have to be bothered with speculative ideas that can't be proven.
And others, who may want to discuss speculative ideas, should have their own forum without fear of being intimidated or insulted for not being able to offer proof of these ideas.
Why does this have to be more complicated than that?
Perhaps people are getting caught up in the fact that the term "history" is used differently by historians than it generally is by others. Should someone post a discussion in the "history" section if it has to do with talking ABOUT history - or only if it contains certain levels of proof?
In addition, the term "theory" means something different to historians than it may to others, who might use the term to refer to ideas that, by their nature, are NOT proven - in other words, it's just a theory.
The other issue which needs to be handled in forming another forum is the use of a moderator. The way I see it, the moderator's main job is not to decide on whose arguments are right or wrong, but to maintain the rules of engagement. This is the only way people will be able to feel comfortable in participating. And the current rules don't sound unreasonable - they just have to be strictly enforced.