Catspaw said:

From Jeri and Wolfgang to McGrath and Bill D, you have received all kinds of reponse but nooooooo.....not enough and they don't match what you want. Joe gives you a factual answer of exactly the reality of the situation and you don't like it either. More debate is required. Yeah, right.....my fuckin' ass more debate......If that horse you're beating gets noticed by the local constabulary, you'll be arrested for abuse of a corpse!

If I am being abusive to you....GOOD!!! Perhaps you will understand better because you HAVE to be masochistic!!! You have been told in a thousand ways that no one else much cares but you continue. Well that's okay I guess.....You deserve your opinion!

Joe Offer said:
Well, Shambles, I suppose you have a point there, if you want to get all legalistic. But generally, if a post is primarily a disagreement of ideas, that's one thing. If it's strictly an ad hominem (personal) attack, that's another thing. The personal attacks get deleted. If it's a personal attack that's mixed in with something that's mostly a discussion of ideas, then it gets messy. And then we have to use a bit of judgment.

AND

"I don't make value judgments on stuff like that. If it's an attack and somebody calls it to my attention, I'm obligated to delete it. Sorry. -Joe Offer- "

Perhaps you could explain the difference to me in a bit more detail preferably with reference to the Official Line? Catspaw's post sure reads like an attack to me. Is that all one has to do then - wrap up one's attack? I can see many taking notice and ready to follow this example. Sigh.