Originally Posted by
Bucking Bar
If the moderators clamp down on flame bait and argumentative speech (which focuses on people and not the issues) the web board will be better for it.
Sometimes "flame bait," "argumentative speech," and "focus on people and not the issues" is a matter of opinion. For example, I state that DALPA has accepted bankruptcy as a reset and has no objective for restoration. And you would probably call that flame bait, argumentative, and without basis in fact. The problem is that there is plenty of evidence to support my position. You just don't like the evidence so you dismiss it as irrelevant or wrong.
Originally Posted by
Bucking Bar
In reality I've sent Carl PM's offering him a client of ours for his consulting business (in other words, money). That is a pretty clear indication that I wish him nothing but the best professionally and personally. Your post is representative of exactly the sort of misrepresentation which should be moderated.
You compared Carl to Joan Rivers (who just died) and stated that Joan Rivers will be missed but Carl would not. It's not that much of a stretch to infer that you were saying you wouldn't miss Carl if he died... so if that's not what you meant, then I would suggest you clear it up now rather than keep digging a hole for yourself.