>Now let me ask you a question. . .
>
>You took issue with my reply to GeorgeT, noting that it took away from the high quality of the prior replies. I felt that a recent thread I started regarding proposed changes for the Europa Wish List on UT was also a "quality" item deserving of quality responses. For your reference it is thread #708412.
>I started the thread at 12:31 hrs and at 12:55 hrs NancyF replied in a highly negative and totally unfruitful manner. This was followed 6 minutes later by a reply by EdR and the ridiculing was off to the races. It wasn't until 17:04 hrs that day (over 4 hours later) that someone with enough gumption chose to ignore the ridicule and offer a constructive reply. Between 12:55hr and 17:04hr there were 8 replies, all following NancyF's lead and participating in the ridicule.
>Now the question: Where were your comments regarding denigrating a thread in THAT case???? (and in this case it set a tone right at the start that entirely polluted the whole seriousness of the thread. Mine, at least, was at the end).

Jim,

I replyu to what I read and with what I think. I have no soapbox and ma not interested in what he said or she said before in some other thread. I saw Nancy's post and Ed's additon and then George's comment that he agreed and thought they had done a good job of stating their opition (which I agree that bpth Nancy and Ed stated thier positions well). Then I saw your post which seemed, to me anway, to be pure sarcasm. So I commented. Nothing more, nothing less.