I think this is interesting. I 'd like to add that as I read down the thread there were a couple of times when I felt like flaming it. The origingal question was good and there have been many good answers. The ones that made me want to flame are the ones that self-congratulate the poster on his maturity as opposed to the presumed maturity of the flamer. As an iconoclastic canadian I have a great desire to puncture pomposity and self-adoration.

The logic for replying to flamers seems a little odd and one-sided. Given that it is possible to send personal messages of support to those who are attacked in a flame there is no need to respond to the flamer to show support. Being rude to those who are rude does nothing to improve the forum and merely allows the replier to vent while abusing the possibly frustrated and upset flamer for venting him/herself. Sometimes the evidenced desire of responders to prove superior mental capacity and emotional development reminds me of a 13 year old friend teasing her younger sister by jumping up and down yelling "Sister's Immature! Sister's Immature!"

The question of why people persistently respond to flamers is also interesting. Do they get a charge out of playing victim? Do they like the feel of their blood boiling in outrage, like people only reading about the gunshots and murders and ignoring beautiful babies and cheerful everyday life? Clearly I am better and more mature than they are as I don't respond to flamers just as they are clearly more mature than the flamers. Umm?

As you might guess I dislike rudeness from anybody, flamer or not. I'm not prissy I just think that after every flame war more of the fun of Mudcat has been lost. My pleasure in reading threads disintegrates as the degree to which people feel free to indulge wit and intelligence is hampered by angry self-aggrandizing first-thought-but-no-second thought posting.