You may have missed this also.

Careful, Shambles. I did not call anyone names, although I did indicate that people who engaged in certain conduct might be considered such. And your frequently-quoted "pain-in-the-ass" citation referred to a person without a name, a person who preferred to be judged by actions - actions which were clearly troublesome and provocative. No doubt you will stretch and misapply my words as you so often do, but let it be noted that I named no names. I refer to conduct, not to persons. If a person's conduct fits the description, then the reader can draw his or her own conclusion.
-Joe Offer-

The outbursts and personal attacks upon fellow posters have now subsided and without any apology for them - our forum is now expected to simply forget these and now address the far more reasoanable tone of the following (made in a coventional posting).

So, Shambles, what was the issue in this thread anyhow? If I recall, you complained because a volunteer renamed a thread from Minister say's jamming OK to Minister say's jamming OK in UK. The appropriate action would have been for you to contact me in a personal message, and then we could have discussed the matter. I would have been glad to rename the thread to UK Minister says jamming is OK, which would have been clear, precise, and grammatically and factually correct.

No - it would still have been just misleading as the title currently still imposed upon it but just as importantly still credited to me as the thread's originator.

If you gave the same subject to say 10 posters and asked them to provide a thread title for it - you would probably have 10 different titles. All of them (given the limitations) being just as clear and just as unclear as each other. Now if you are going to have one volunteer fellow poster imposing their judgement of their and choice of title upon every thread title - this impostion would be fair and any complaints about the titles's clarity could be addressed to this volunteer.

As the current practice is not this - it is unfair and if any originator feels they may have been unfairly selected for imposition -this selected imposition only - makes any claim made about the imposition being unfair and personally motivated impossible to defend.

The appropriate action as far as my personal posting policy (which appear is now placed in my FAQ) is concerned - is for my words - unless there are abusive personal attacks - name-calling or offensive language - to appear as posted. If anyone wishes to make any change to them (for clarity) they are welcome to contact me via PM and ask for for my permission to do so.

Why is is the request for a any title change to be made first to the originator - only thought to be nit-picking? Is the intial action - the imposed change - not equally nit-picking? And whatever 'clarity' thought to be gained - not really worth the risk of upsetting anyone by its imposition?