[nopardons]

You're too easily upset. I didn't call you a " sleeper "; just agreed that it was a possibility. A stated FACT, is NOT an insult. You most assuredly appeared to not understand the posted article. You certainly do NOT know the rules for posting.All combined, you are not going to be a " happy little poster " , here, much of the time. BTW, that is my observation, as well as my opinion. Others won't be nearly as civil, to you, as I have been, on this thread. And NO , that is NOT against the rules. :-)

[enrg]

You're too easily upset. I didn't call you a " sleeper "; just agreed that it was a possibility.

True. Your right about the possibility bit. But stating it is probable? C'mon.... You should be able to realise the implication of that.

A stated FACT, is NOT an insult.

True. Now point to the post that PROVES i'm a sleeper. You also said "Look, no one has flamed nor insulted you". Metesky did call me a sleeper. So yes someone did insult me. If you're not insulted by such a name, thats fine by me.

You most assuredly appeared to not understand the posted article.

OK. This is getting rediculous. Just tell me one thing. Do you base this on the fact that I did NOT state my position regarding the article? If so, fair enough. Just say it. I wasn't aware of the need to immediately state my position.

You certainly do NOT know the rules for posting.

Well. Point me in the right direction then.

And NO , that is NOT against the rules. :-)

Fine. But personal attacks are against the rules. I consider being called a sleeper a personal attack. Although you didn't quite say it, Metesky did and that's why I became aggravated. BTW, I was a happy little poster up until that accusation.