Hi there, Joe.

For what it's worth, I'd say y'all have way too many tricky issues muddying the water, tangled up with actions and words that fit my understanding of the nature of disrespect, name-calling, and bullying. It can't be solved by shouting more loudly than others or by leaving the discussion.

I can deal quite easily with an exploration of how we complex creatures use humour/humor to deal with illness, death, discomfort, pain, fear, and grief. I can understand that some of the folks here will differ dramatically in their handling and perceptions of the issues that are likely to arise in comparing your ideas on the subject with mine, say. I can choose to respectfully agree or disagree with what I encounter in such a discourse. I can even leave the discussion and decide whether or not to take it up again when someone's views upset me. I can choose to respond rather than react.

However, I take issue with any discussion that is used to tear down named individuals whether in the public eye or not. I object even more strongly to seeing a Mudcat discussion used by both members and Moderators to verbally slam and play power games with members and Moderators due to differing points of view, prior negative history between individuals, nationality, or any other cause. It is not productive. It causes harm. It is what has given Max's wonderful creation a bad smell.

The subject matter is important. The way it is approached makes a difference. Everyone posting here is deserving of respect. Everyone posting here is capable of using PMs to resolve personal issues and to offer clarification where there has been misunderstanding. Some would do well to cool down and make peace.

The 50/50 split you mention doesn't include those who can't believe spring fever has choked out common sense. Time to calm down and re-evaluate.

Respectfully,

maeve