Big Mick you wrote that "Personal attacks are simply not allowed... But members need to understand that there is a difference between a personal attack, and an attack on one's position."

Imo, one problem with that statement is that individuals may have different takes on what is "a personal attack" and what is "an attack on one's position".

I could name a recent thread in which I was the object of a personal attack. The thread starter-a guest btw-even posted the comment that "I hate to be minatory, but I'd be grateful if we could stop the personal attacks and stick to the point, if people wouldn't mind." But, in my opinion, those comments that I consider personal attacks continued.

To my knowledge, only one post to that thread appears to be deleted {as a subsequent comment alludes to it}, and the thread was not closed.

And, before someone asks, no I didn't complain to any moderator. Some moderators posted to that thread, and one of them-you Big Mick- along with other members spoke out in support of me and you, Big Mick out attempted to re-direct one of the posters {all of whom are members of this forum} who had targeted me. My way of dealing with that situation was to leave that thread.

Though I wouldn't wish that experience on anybody, I do believe that there could be some educational value in threads like that-for instance, in off-line classes or online & off-line discussions about group dynamics. Part of me is glad that those posts weren't deleted or that thread wasn't closed. In my opinion, it shows a non-sanitized aspect of Mudcat which is as real as the informative, supportive, positive threads that I think are much more numerous than the other kind.

However, based on that experience, and based on other threads that I have read where it appeared to me that other people were unfairly targeted by members, my sense is that in some instances some members can be just as problematic as some guests.