No Roger,

It's not that I WISH to believe it. From reading threads on this subject started over the past three years, I have observed it for myself, and I am not the least bit interested in following your interminable list of links. (by the way, you forgot to put this one in).

As for emotive terms, once again responses observed prove this to be the case.

Please do not misquote me, or try to twist what I say to your own ends. I clearly stated that I did not condone the use of ungentlemanly language (as you very well know), and ignoring that to alter my meaning is much closer to censorship than anything that has been done to you.

I did in fact say that Joe had been provoked by you into responding in a, for him, quite uncharacteristic fashion, and that I could UNDERSTAND the feelings that would make this gentle, courteous man cross that line.

I stand by that comment, and further, feel that it is you who is shamed by these events, not Joe.

You should ( but probably won't) ask yourself why you are the only persona who has managed to elicit this response.

Judgements of you, based on YOUR behaviour, are opinions backed by the evidence of said behaviour, and as such are valid posts IMO.

While the three pejoratives you complain of are not very nice, I think you must accept that there are many more posters than just Joe who (whether they say so directly or not) who see you in that light.

One who constantly attempts to divide, and disrupt, and is impervious to any and all pleas to desist might fairly be described as a boor, or a buffoon, as these are terms in the English language coined for the purpose.

As to your last sentence " and these threats, name-calling, incitement, insults and personal judgements and insults are not from me and there are no responses in kind from me to to them.":-

THREATS:- I'll grant you that one. You do not threaten, but then again, the only threat you have received from Joe is the threat of post or thread deletion; quite reasonable IMO, and please don't bother to remind me about the "what if we were to link you with...etc". A hypothetical question to illustrate a point is not a threat, and you know that Joe did not mean it as such.

NAME CALLING:- Not much to say here, except "anonymous fellow posters"; "edit button holders", and sundry other terms designed to denigrate and dehumanise the team appointed by Max to moderate HIS, not OUR forum. It IS name calling, my friend, and I think you know that.

INCITEMENT:- Who is it who has for several months been asking Joe to go and set up another forum? Who is it who has for several years been inciting the membership to join his campaign to get rid of the moderators, and continues so to do, thankfully without result?

PERSONAL JUDGEMENTS:- Almost every post from you contains your personal judgement of the moderators (and, by association, Max who places his trust and faith in them). You have, over the years stated that they are unfair, biased, incompetent, and bullies. You have not so far used the word corrupt, but it is clear, from your expressed opinions, that the word is in your mind.

INSULTS:- Your personal judgements ARE an insult to the integrity and honesty of the moderators and to the intelligence of Max, who appointed them.

Climb down off your high horse, read your own posts for a change, and see yourself as others see you. It should be a chastening experience.

And look, I managed all this without a single cut 'n paste, or link to another thread. It's all my own opinion, and you are free to ignore it, but if you do reply, try to contribute something new, and pertinent.

Don T.