If it's an "attack" to point out that someone only posts on eligibility threads, and to point out that the questions I asked weren't addressed, then I guess I'm guilty. I wonder if you thought what I wrote about "standing" in response to the FRaudster was without merit? I wonder if you think suggesting that the eligibility issue be decided by a court on the merits is without merit.
ML/NJ
The point is not how you define “attack”. The point is that going after other freepers doesn’t do anything to prove your view of the issue. Argue the issue. Accept that other freepers can legitimately have different opinions. It’s not hard.