tried to post 2 hours ago, but Mudcat was like molasses.

hmmm...

As a senior member of Mudcat who has been a member from even earlier (Nov.'96) (Bert beat me) than the earliest days, I might have to offer some nominations...

Problem is, there's categories, as well as Dan levels. There are 'sanctimonious crusaders' with have causes who can turn any topic into their inevitable channel... there are 'malevolent trolls' who seem to look for ways to bait the unwary by exaggerated arguments.. there are the 'ethnically humorous' who use (often very) clever wit to play some personal game of debating by creative insult... there are the 'simply contentious' who seldom say anything that is not sarcastic or critical... and there are the Jekyll/Hyde 'hail fellow/good guys' who can become arm-waving threats in response to some perceived fault in the poster's intent....etc.

I do wonder at some of the real problems...like the "Once Famous" Martin Gibson, who seemed at times like he was trying to win a bet about how long he'd be tolerated.

You can probably add to the list.. or even do a better job of expressing mine.... and perhaps you wear one of those categories as a badge of honor.. ☺

(I wonder if there's a category for excessively garrulous explication? Maybe I'd better go check my PMs)