In contrast, I have seen blatant attacks go unchallenged.
I'm just wondering about what seems to be some inconsistancy.
Earlier this morning, you removed a post from Wrigley and instructed him to "Stop trying to start a flame war.".
I've seen the post and I talked to Wrigley -there was no way that post was remotely "baiting" -nor did Wrigley intend to "start a flame war".
It was a serious question put to Alamo-Girl in an attempt to get her to clarify her position.
Due to the fact that you removed his post and responded to him as you did, other readers who did not have the opportunity to read that post are left with the impression that Wrigley was playing games.
Yet, BigMack's taunting post remained because he included a smiley face and said he was joking an hour later.
I don't get it.
Jean
I don't get it.
I asked "BigMack" if I came out of the blue, him not having seen me before, and jumped into the middle of a discussion he was having with someone, and said this, "Your post is one as of a braindead neanderthal. You are a miserable failure. I am deeply saddened", would he take that as a "joke"?
No response from BigMack.
It amazes me that the Mod expected me to read into a "smiley face", BigMack's intentions. His words in the insult spoke much clearer than some subjective "emoticon".