John;

Long ago I gave up looking at threads between you and Steve. I will pass them by as the ones I did read were not productive and not something I wish to read. When either of you posts something not related to "talking to each other", it is worth reading.


When Steve has addressed you in the past he has used "labels" which do not have an explanation. It seems that something you said or did in the past has aggravated him. It reminds me of a married couple that fights and the reason or reasons for the fighting has been forgotten but yet continues.

You both have your own points of view but if you address each other it is like “two cats in a bag”! However, you come across as rational and Steve as out of control during your personal exchanges. When the two of you are not addressing each other you are both rational.

As I have said before, let there be peace.

Tom

P.S. I avoid “Howard Stern” and others like him. Life is too short for such things from my perspective.



>>
>Although you do not intentionally persue an argument, it happens anyway, and to most people that's entertainment.
><
>
>That much is true. The folks that say they hate seeing it are probably the very people that love it the most. I call it the Howard Stern syndrome. 50% of the people that love him tune it hear what he will say next. The other 50% of the people, those that hate him, tune in to hear what he will say next.
>
><<
>But it's not that you are arguing that is entertaining, it's the points you bring up in the arguments and seeing how strong the points can become during the course of the argument.
><<
>
>You mean the points that relate to being a pathological liar, and being an unethical person? You would need to address those with the author of those points.
>
>
>>I'm pretty sure I don't speak just for myself.
>
>I am sure you don't...