Quote Originally Posted by JMA View Post
You have access to the log files for this site I assume. Go sit with your cronies and do a little research. I will wait.
You made the accusation, not I.
The term 'crossing the line' is very subjective and even more so if you are involved in the discussion yourself. Do you appreciate that?
Certainly I appreciate both those factors. I would not have written what I did had I not. What you do not seem to 'appreciate' is that approach gives you more, not less, latitude to be egregious...
Take the thread UK in Afghanistan where I will concede I was only 99% correct and you and many others were up to 99% wrong. All you could come up with was a complaint about my posting style and use of words.
Uh, I hate to break this to you but your 99% is probably overstatement. Regardless I agree with much of substance you wrote in that thread. I did not and do not agree with your posting style and use of words on many occasions, thus my complaints were directed at what I saw as a problem. That comment applies to several other threads as well; what you see as speaking the truth as you see it is often seen by others as condescending, arrogant and unnecessarily abrasive. If your intent in to annoy, you're quite successful; if it is to teach or aid progress, I'm afraid that IMO and based on some comments from others on this and various threads (certainly including The UK in Afghanistan), you are not doing as well as one could hope.
Remember the furore over my one time use of the word poser? Pathetic.
Yes I do and I agree that your use of the word was wrong and possibly uncalled for if not pathetic -- that usage is just what I and others repeatedly complain about to you to little avail. That exemplifies the ability to do some good can get lost in a poor choice of words -- and ignorance or misunderstanding what one sees casually in a photograph to make a standing broad jump at a wrong conclusion and then defend it unto death can be counterproductive...
Remember what a storm my comments on that pathetic US ambush caused? Sad that rank incompetence can be so blindly protected.
As the Actress said to the Bishop, "It's not what you said, it's how you said it, Ducks..."

You may think you're merely being forthright and not mincing words, others often seem to perceive it quite differently.
As moderators one should deal rapidly with the emotional knee-jerk replies rather than suppress the truth no matter how painful. You can figure out how to do that yourself.
I've seen no truth suppression here -- distortion, yes, suppression no. Though I'll acknowledge that blithefully ignoring the valid comment of others with a differing point of view and continually beating the same drum(s) in spite of some evidence that a re-look may be in order can be, in a sense, tantamount to suppression.

Let me point out, not as a Moderator, merely as another poster, that none of this has much to do with the thread topic. Nor, also off thread, did you answer my question about your accusatory foray that took us off-thread in the first place, thus it is safe to presume you have no such case to support your accusation.