I’m sorry but I don’t quiet understand the point of continuing to rehash the thread in some type of blow-by-blow way. How does it move the discussion forward or enlighten anyone about anything? How is it constructive? Dan apologized for deleting the thread and for losing him temper. He took responsibility for his actions. As BBC said, he manned up. Quite a few people have already maturely accepted his apology. Do you really want me to hold the people still gnawing on the bone accountable for *their* actions? FYI, I am not a big fan of arbitrating shares of responsibility. Without delving into the details I am certain there is enough blame to go around.
Sorry, Jim, but Dan did the absolute minimum. It read like pure CYA stuff and was as genuine as the pleather on my $10 sneakers. That people are interested in reviewing what happened after hours of their work and thought was deleted shouldn’t surprise you in the least. Further, it’s disingenuous to claim there’s blame to be shared. I took my share of punches on the thread and Dan’s is the only behavior I object to. Reading through this thread I don’t see anyone taking anyone other than Dan to task; not even veer bender, whose post allegedly triggered the thread deletion.
As for my part in the thread, Dan’s was dishonest then, and continued to be so in this thread, where he wrote:
And tshipman, thanks for tallying the times I was a dick. We can’t all be blessed like you, that can just look at their post count. And let’s not forget that you’re more obsessed with Ray DiPerna than John Hinckley Jr. was with Jodie Foster. And you’re actually a more civil person than somethingother or veer bender!
This is downright sad.
The first time Dan appeared in the thread that I was aware of, it was to personally attack me.
I had been talking to a couple of libertarians about the selfishness of their position, and its internal hypocrisy. Dan was not mentioned at all, discussed AT ALL, either directly or by implication, and simply bounced into the thread as though I had personally attacked him and went on the warpath, attacking me personally. Unfortunately, that wasn’t unusual for him. For all his griping about other posters supposed dreadful behavior, Dan is the baby who smacks people and runs away, then whines if anyone takes him to task for it. He’s the infant who grabs his toys and runs home sobbing just because he’s losing.
And, he’s going to do it again the next time it suits him. As for you, Jim, accusing people of “gnawing on the bone” is small, and seems unlike you. As for the veiled threat of ‘holding people accountable for their actions’, what on earth does that mean?
Common sense suggests you let people air their grievances without clapping your hands after 130 posts and saying ‘that’s enough you spoiled brats. Time for bed!’