No Steve, I think you were doing it as a joke, but addressing Jack as you continually do, does not open the door to constructive debate.

You and I disagree about several things, but we dont address our post to one another in a manner which suggests mental deficiency?

Jack and I always argue about something or other, but I have always found him intelligent and civil. Why the need to demean him before even starting into the debate, if not as an undermining tactic?

Ian does the same to me all the time, when I point out that his procedures are not working and that MSM infection rates are still rising rapidly, he does not address the issue, but resorts to personal attacks, accusing me of homophobia, holding my "odious views in contempt", saying I should be ignored by other members and what I say should be regarded as "hate speech"
All this as an alternative to discussing WHY the procedures he supports are not working and what alternatives are available.

Well, you see, ake, I asked you to justify your assertion that I was leaving a gaping hole in my argument just because I called Wacko Wacko. Thus:

Ah, you mean I covered up some big gaping hole somewhere because I called Wacko Wacko? How's that work, then, ake?

I note with dismay that you choose to post aimless verbiage instead of addressing this point. So, I repeat (sort of). You are not keen on my calling Wacko Wacko. But what exactly is it about that that means I have covered up some big gaping hole somewhere? I note that you have not addressed this point, instead posting a bunch of obscurantist waffle (see above).

Found Wacko intelligent and civil, huh? What a lovely fellow you quite possibly are, but one does have to doubt your judgement on this one. Doubt? Nah, bollocks. It's rubbish!