Col,
it goes really without saying but just in case there's a doubt I wish you everything in your marriage that you would wish for yourself.

Davidf,
Your point was/is well understood but noted anyway.

It seems to me that sometime some folks make unreasonable assumptions.
To my mind there are rules to this site as there are in life.
I have little sympathy with someone who ignores the rules them tries to claim victim status. Sure one is entitled to ignore the rules but must accept the consequences. That includes me.

My understanding is that everyone is entitled to express an opinion and as an open site that 'opinion can be challenged' what IS against the rules is calling people names and otherwise attacking the person.

As to my alleged "sanctimony"(?) which is an apparent crime worth of note by some. I would suggest that are matters of style/morality both subjects of OLO approbation. While I may not agree with runner, OUG or the style of Peter the believer they are as I entitled to personal respect.

I look forward at some time debating with you the conceptual point of differentiation between concern for the rules and others Versus the personal responsibility avoidance diversion of shooting the messenger including on a public web site.

Oh pontificator that twaddle-o-meter is running hot!

Seriously, what HAVE you got against commas, or for that matter little words like they, it, the, and plurals?

'I look forward at some time debating with you the conceptual point of differentiation between concern for the rules and others Versus the personal responsibility avoidance diversion of shooting the messenger including on a public web site.'

That's some sentence!

For someone who acts so high and mighty, you'd think you'd make an effort to play the part by using grammar to go with your big words.

And 'entitled to personal respect'? To have personal respect one would have to know one personally, and nobody is 'entitled' to anything, it must be earned. You're not going to get it from me once you grandstand that you are more altruistic than the rest of the OLO populace. You're also not going to get it by attempting to police ettiquite on OLO without being squeaky clean yourself.

“Marie is a great lady and does most of the work. I live by the sweat of my frau.”

Funny. So I’m guessing caring for kids I should really have known that but never heard of it before. Each page of Marie’s book has a character with a describing word (okay I know right there I am closing in on being completely illiterate) then the poem about the character? That is so cool. Yep I have to try it.

Angry Anti was absent he appears to have gone
Some men were looking but they didn’t look long
Some women took action while some others just spewed
He’s not here and online seems more pleasant, less crude

Belly baby started this thread with the very first say
Why are you here and tell me what makes you stay?
Some people responded well without repercussion
Belly we come here for all the online discussion!”

Cunning Col looking dapper asked her the question
And the beautiful lady agreed but had a suggestion
From now on my love until we both say our vows
You inhabit online opinion but minus the rows

Darling David has graced us with his wife’s words
I loved them, I know mine aren’t as clever as hers
Never before heard of a abecedary book of rhyme
Did I do okay David? Did you like mine?

PS.. knuckles CJ, Fractelle and Houel Homies![smile]

Yes me too Col may it be a great day and even better life for you and the lady.
Hope you are not a cricket fan because we are bringing the ashes home.
TPP I can not make up my mind what you are on about.
Sorry weak effort at humor, runner was not my target but then again.

PP you crack me up. If you ever need help vacillitating anyone, you just give me a call.

Part 1
Houellebecq,

Wiser more talented people have pointed out my appalling grammar , prose and spelling.
I will try and slow down and work on it.
'tis undeniable, I suck at the above :-(

The logic of the substance of your criticism is fatally flawed. By your logic of, the “accuser” must be perfect then no policeman, judge, jury could ever decide on any criminal. None of them are perfect either.

Likewise, I doubt that you would be as boorishly rude at a dinner party where you knew few of the guests. If someone commented on your rudeness should the person be attacked as if guilty of some...unnamed crime? Or should you just drop the offensiveness and continue? To me the answer is obvious.

Now about being the 'pontificator' or as davidf was politely saying
no one likes (in your idiom) "a goody two shoes smart arse".
True but is that what I'm really doing?

That depends on if you feel(as opposed to reason) that facts, context, knowledge and objectivity are irrelevant in general discussion opinion.
If so, It seems to me that such opinions' sole purpose is to justify the logically unjustifiably wanton.

We ignore and even justify our indifference to the plight of others with such gems as the rhetorically intended ;
'we're too busy', 'it's none of our business',' what can I do?', 'the law is an ass' and the most offensive 'it's because of X'

Tell me H, where is the point of demarcation between being a member of society with inherent responsibilities and allowing the law or the most ruthless?
If I point out that some excuse is a diversionary tactic I get attacked for the crime of 'supercilious superiority'.
I was raised with humanistic mentality that we are all responsible for what we do and WHAT WE FAIL TO DO.