For those who don't I have seen some well thought out arguments and I suppose we could continue those discussions and probably agree to disagree....a well tested Mudcat scenario.

Sadly one that has long been replaced by another well tested Mudcat senario. Where even on the rare occasions when a poster does bother to explain why they may not agree - it is now thought acceptable to also make some personal judgement of the poster's worth. Or indeed to post only this.

For it now seems to be thought just much too much fun to resist - when posters express different views to you - to call them names, question their mental health, speculate on the size of their gentitals, the state of their bowel movements and tell them to F***-***.

I can think where this example of posting behaviour came from - or why it is now allowed to be thought acceptable posting behaviour. Perhaps it was the poster who came up with words like 'fuckwit' and first encouraged their use them in this manner?

Subject: RE: BS: Censorship on Mudcat
From: catspaw49 - PM
Date: 26 Feb 05 - 11:25 PM

A dipshit is the offspring of a jerkwad and a fucknuts. It's in the fourth tier of profane vocabulary.

Spaw

It really is still OK to simply be seen to agree to disagree.