[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think the views of those who frequently name-call and engage in other childish and destructive behaviors on the forum should even count towards a vote on such a banning.

[/ QUOTE ]

In the past some may opine that you have been fairly liberal in the use of name calling against posters you disagree with, no doubt when your hackles were up and in the heat of battle. In the present system, it turns out that the vote against JW was of exactly one person, who has been allegedly guilty (albeit, perhaps, not as much as others) of the behaviour that you think should disqualify a person from voting.

Do you see the problem yet?

[/ QUOTE ]

In the past I admit to having at times referred to Cyrus as a chucklehead or you as a nitwit--and/or suggested as much. However I have not done this frequently considering the total number of exchanges we have had. My criteria for disqualification on the vote referred to are that someone has name-called frequently and engaged in other childish and destructive behaviors on the forum--which I haven't. Moreover I think it is only Cyrus and you that I saw fit to grace in such a manner and it was often partially in jest. One may certainly hold nitwitted views without being a certified nitwit. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Heck I've been known to do that on occasion too. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I don't think that should disqualify me from having had the "moral authority" to have banned jokerswild for much more severe and frequent offenses. As I've often posted, often everything hinges on degree--as it does in this case.