Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-99.73.35.159-20181005201301/@comment-35243530-20181016153443

JodiinWY wrote: Lilboops wrote: There was no “vitriol” in the OP, nor in any of the responses.

I do, however, take umbrage with anon posters. You don’t have to register, but at least give yourself some cred by signing your username. /shrugs Really Lilboops? Because I found immense vitriol in the last sentence of your post where you said you changed your name to "stfu." I take it you didn't care for the original poster's question, which I found to be interesting and of merit. I don't find much merit in an insulting response like that, when someone has merely posed a question. If I started writing that into all my legal arguments I would be disbarred. If I started insulting those who posted valid questions, my arguments would lose value.

I could be wrong (It’s happened once or twice) but I think the issue was that the OP was potentially stirring up trouble but refusing to identify themself. If you insisted on remaining anonymous in making all of your arguments, I think your arguments would lose credibility and value too.

That said, I think many responded emotionally at first, with cooler heads prevailing later on. Since your sarcasm could be interpreted as being rather insulting, perhaps you’d like to follow that path too? Just an observation, since you’re advocating against name calling and insulting responses. This isn’t a courtroom, nor is anyone here being held to the standards of one (though I’ve seen some rather insulting responses written into legal arguments and I believe the judicial response is to usually sanction such things with contempt rather than the extreme of pushing for disbarment).

Please don’t take this the wrong way and overreact, as I’m only trying to point out a perceived case of “pot” versus “kettle” in as gentle a manner as I can think of.