That's one of the best passive aggressive troll comments posing as a compliment that I have seen in some time.
Sorry that I missed this before. But now I have a sharper eye for people jumping on a bandwagon driven by a willingness to believe and a past agenda. With zero first hand information, but a well informed opinion from a keyboard in Vermont.
Thanks :sifone: But the compliment was indeed sincere, it was a great publication, I meant that.
Like any issue, there's always at least three sides. I do remember another nasty thread on this very same subject some time ago. A good judge has to form an opinion not only based on laws, but what's presented to him. If there are good arguments from both sides, great. The previous posts are correct, this was a personal issue best left personal. But when you allow it to become a public forum issue, don't be surprised when opinions are formed, even if they don't agree with yours. BTW, no agenda here, doesn't affect me. I'm out of this issue, but World of Powerboats is in it today.
http://worldofpowerboats.com/
People have to form opinions in life, no getting around it. Sometimes, opinions are formed with less than perfect information, lack of information, or even agenda-driven opinions.
Just like the CS issue. One side put their "facts" on the table. One side thought it was nasty for them to do so. The important question remain unanswered. It's not bullying to seek important answers, if they remain challenged, but unanswered. Your choice is to avoid these issues at all costs, and attack as internet bullying any attempt to set the record straight. It's been done in politics for years, and the side diverting attention hopes it will just die down and go away. If the people with first-hand knowledge aren't backing up their case, I can only assume they don't want the facts out there.
I can form a personal opinion from what I know about Bill Clinton and his character, and put it in proper perspective as to how important that was in his being President. Likewise, I can form an opinion of CS or LDD based on what's been put forth, arguments against that, and any final conclusion. It's pretty clear to me that your jobs here this year have been to make absolutely sure that there is no final conclusion. That's probably in your best interest. You've chosen to attack those that present their case, as well as those that post an opinion based on what they have read.
So far, the only conclusion you've offered is that those that thought Ding Ding was CS were wrong, therefore everything they say is wrong. Nice tactic. If I based my opinion solely on the comments made by CS and you and others in the CS threads, is that wrong? Is it also wrong to weight an opinion based on facts and copies of documents, none of which were refuted or explained? If I read between the lines carefully enough during that drama, you and others were basically saying none of what was presented mattered, and life goes on as usual. Now the message is that anyone that did care and is still upset, is an internet bully.
BTW, I agree that this particular issue in question should not have gone public. But since one side made it a thread, it was open for discussion.
