Duke, I have no specific gripe with you. Nor do I disagree with a lot of what you just said. There was sniping on both sides and perhaps who started it is immaterial. That said there are a couple of observations that I believe I am entirely justified in making.
Perhaps the time to first jump in wearing your moderators hat was immediately after Dave’s fully personally insulting rant which I quoted above, was it not, on reflection? Rather than let it pass and then instead berate solely me later. Dave’s, rant was direct, and explicitly personally insulting was it not? My saying to Dave subsequently, put your money where your mouth is, was extremely mild by comparison was it not? And in any event it was merely shorthand for requesting of him to prove his declaration that I was making all up that I had been insulted. As I then demonstrated I irrefutably been directly attacked and personally insulted and by him.
I note and have great respect for the fact that in your post, Duke, you apologised to me for causing offence if you had. I note equally that despite Dave’s astoundingly personal attack on me, which I quoted above, his apology for such was merely to you. I know, Duke, that you don’t have the time to read back but if you did I assure you that when I it has appeared I have caused offence to any peep I have always apologised promptly. And you have my word that had I ever indulged in such a patently severe and personal attack on anyone as did Dave on me I would never seek to shirk from full admission of such and would apologise to that person fully and totally in the public domain. I believe such is required by common decency.
Finally, I see this site as what it is or at least should be. A forum, a debating chamber. I am not of the opinion that folks are always so entrenched that they never change their views. Hell, once upon a time I was so entrenched in favour of the death penalty that I would rather have faced such myself for simply holding that belief rather than change my view………LOL However, my view did eventually and has changed as a result of what I have learned. For example in US states where the death penalty either remains of has been reinstated murder rates have risen. In states where it has been abolished it has fallen. I still believe murders deserve the death penalty but I now recognise from the figures that having such a penalty available actually results in more people being murdered. Who knows why? Perhaps the thought of spending one’s whole life in prison is more of a deterrent than thought of a simple lethal injection. The point I’m making is that debate, no matter how entrenched and immovable various parties views appear to be, is still worthwhile. The trick though is surely to ensure that one understands the difference between opposing arguments and ‘an argument’, if you see what I mean. Perhaps that is what we should always remember here. Or to put it differently we should all adhere to the spirit that is inherent in the saying often attributed to Voltaire – ‘I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it’. If we all remember that even if we ardently disapprove of what the other party says we must still respect their right to say it, then we won’t go far wrong will we?
_______________________________________________________________________________________
During the Covid-19 Epidemic I will be wearing a mask and goggles while posting so that if I become infected I won't spread it to you.
.
