I had no intention of joining this cat-fight, but I thought I would make my own position clear as somebody had the discourtesy to mention my name behind my back.
"I hold all of you who form the group which has come to be known by many as 'The Usual Suspects' - Steve, Jim, Keith, Teribus, you, and several others - in the highest, utter contempt."
And I have not much time for those who choose to make accusations such as have been made here behind the backs of "usual suspect's, without informing them first and ascertaining that they have a chance to respond, but there you go – I suppose it's down to what turns you on - or off - as the case may be.
"You people, 'The Usual Suspects', have conspired to wreck thread after thread"
No we haven't, not as far as I can see anyway.
Like Steve and Teribus, (probably the only time I have ever agreed with the latter) I seldom, if ever communicate with other members of this forum - the few times I have has been with people I don't agree with rather than those I wish to "conspire" with.
This is a debating forum and it is made up of people with differing views - sometimes passionately held; more often than not, these "flames" have occurred between contributors who hold opposing left and right views – often a toxic mix
Unless you are going to stick up a "no politics - no religion" notice (seen in pubs occasionally), arguments on subjects considered important are bound to become heated and erupt into shouting matches - we care enough about some things for it to be an ongoing risk - it would happen anywhere, given that mix.
For instance, I care about racism; I believe there are examples of it on the forum which have tended to make it a somewhat W.A.S.P. site – I wouldn't like to be a Muslim on Mudcat (a Forum on traditional music would benefit much from the presence of people with knowledge of Muslim traditions, in my opinion
There are other forms of this disease I feel equally passionate about and will put in an effort to oppose.
I come from an Irish background and it is occasionally difficult to not get angry, thanks to the openly intolerant behaviour of a tiny minority - god only knows how I would feel if I were a Traveller.
I'll take as long as I believe necessary in opposing that behaviour, that's – part of my upbringing.
While I accept entirely that it is totally wrong to allow these (often dialogue or triolog – is that a word?) arguments to dominate and spoil a thread while it is in full flow (I'm as guilty of doing that as any), I see no harm in attempting to take them to a conclusions – as long as it takes – there is no rule to say how long a thread should be – that would put contributors to the totally unmanageable 'The Mother of All BS Threads' out of a job tomorrow.      
It is a form of arrogance to tell people how long they can and can't debate an issue that is important to them.
So fine – let those of us who wish to persist with arguments, do so when the subject has run its natural course and let those who have no more to say leave us to it - these subjects d#on't actually 'belong' to anybody and there really is no compulsion to take part.
As far as name calling is concerned; up to fairly recently it was my practice to pick a nickname for people whose views I found offensive (not those I disagreed with – just the offensive ones I came up against regularly).
Joe Offer, in his gently persuasive way, pointed out that this was childish so I stopped – others (at least one) has yet to do likewise and has consistently refused to do so
That same individual consistently talks down to anybody who disagrees with him, often in and extremely insulting personal manner – there is a prime example of him doing so here..
I used to find it cute and amusing as one would a badly behaved child; now I find it just irritating - the child has taken his 'cuteness' too far – there is only so long that you can put up with such arrogance without reacting similarly, stupid, I know.
Name calling is childish, though some of us occasionally resort to it – I have noticed that those who complain loudest are often the greatest culprits (I'm saying this as a an experienced "Muppet and ignoramous")
The only way to stop this is for us all to agree to do so, otherwise, it will continue to be a feature of these arguments until that happens.
These are a name missing from the list of 'usual suspects' and I'm at a bit of a loss to understand why.
I have become extremely angry and sickened at the behaviour of one regular poster who is, in my opinion, a prime example of the racism I refer to, who refuses to engage in discussion or argument, who posts reams of Islamophobic racism gathered from some of the most extreme sites, and responds to any argument with vitriolic bile in the form of accusing his with unwarranted and totally unjustified accusations of "Anti-Semitism".
Such a person needs to clean up his act or be given his marching orders – there really is no place for that behaviour on a debating forum.
I won't mention a name – I'm sure I don't need to, tho it is interesting to not that he has his silent supporter here.
This is a debating site – passions are going to run high on certain subjects, it would be incredibly boringly anodyne if they weren't allowed to.
Given the range of knowledge and experience of some of those involved, it could be a perfect place to learn as well as to pass on what we all know.
I agree with Backwoodsman when he says that you are not going to change people's minds – but it's a great opportunity to expand your own knowledge and understanding while passing on what you have, or think you have to offer.
Jim Carroll