X_Larsson:
So more ad hominem being dished out (but not by me, but by the "caring" and "tolerant" people, again?), while the straight forward question from myself and @Letters and Numbers remains un-addressed.

And it would be helpful to see the justification given as a final post if a discussion is shut down.

Can we by the way assume that ad hominem to the level used against me and some others is "free for all" to use without any repercussions? Is that the core and spirit of this board of "open" and "tolerant" people? Today it seems to be the way.

Morbidly A Beast:
At no point did anyone ever say your argument was invalid because of things you cannot control, that is what constitutes an ad hominem attack. You were corrected on a issue and you doubled down on the issue and had a tantrum when you refused to take the L and apologize

Tolerant people have a right to intolerate intolerance

X_Larsson:
So more ad hominem being dished out (but not by me, but by the "caring" and "tolerant" people, again?), while the straight forward question from myself and @Letters and Numbers remains un-addressed.

And it would be helpful to see the justification given as a final post if a discussion is shut down.

Can we by the way assume that ad hominem to the level used against me and some others is "free for all" to use without any repercussions? Is that the core and spirit of this board of "open" and "tolerant" people? Today it seems to be the way.

Munchies:


Darling, I believe you and I have very different recollections of how that conversation went. That said, do you really believe this is the wisest way to go about this?

Because while I have no desire to rehash what happened beyond what I've already said, I can't promise the same for others. If you honestly believe that you are the victim of ad hominem attacks (though I don't believe you are), wouldn't calling attention to that previous altercation put a target on your for ad hominem attacks?

There's this thing called the Streisand effect. You should look into it.