>I have tried to adopt this principle throughout this thread. In response there has been some agreement, some precious pique that I would dare to question the mighty, and some directed flaming (literally).
>
>IMHO we all need to stop, take a deep breath, and ask ourselves whether we are really so precious and perfect that we can sulk or lash out at anybody who questions us or the integrity of what we say.
>
>IMHO people like ER will display sufficient humility and professionalism to be able to cope with criticism or even the frank "flaming" without trying to punish by withdrawing support, which is a crude form of bullying (don't dare confront me or I will punish everybody and make you a pariah). I don't believe he will do it.
>

I don't plan to threaten to withdraw my support for UT. I will, however, be far less inclined to post code that I roll on the fly, especially for people who're more interested in highlighting the shortcomings of some off-the-cuff code that I kludged up. Why? It's not worth the annoyance that comes from posting a reply where I post code off the top of my head, which isn't error-free and ready to use. It's not enough that I think about a problem, spend a few minutes looking at it and posting some code; I'm expected to copy-edit it, address all possible flaws and functional limitations, and furnish individual technical support at my expense related to the code!

Some of this is hyperbole, but a good deal of reality is behind it. I've been broadly critiqued for posting code off the top of my head that contained typos, or that could exhibit side effects if you misused the code as presented. I've had people state that I put deliberate errors in code that I posted.

My treachery and malevolence have acquired legendary stature. Clearly, I ought to be given the UT user # 666!

And I'll bet that the consistently poor quality of my code is why people ask me to post a piece of code for them - I'm a great negative barometer; if my code looks anything like theirs, they must be on the wrong track!