Not me, but why did you snip out part of the basis of my arguement?

and Ellen admitted so when she stated in one of her replies that she expected flames

This tells me it was a deliberate attempt to fan free publicity via negative means for their products and services. Others who have promoted themselves here have done so positively and without dubious intentions AFAIK.

>"While EPS also pays for ads here [I think], their intentions were not entirely honorable. They intended to shove a stick into an ant bed to further the discussion"
>
>OK, so if EPS pays for ads, now we're back to the "intentions not entirely honorable".
>
>You can color it with all the intellectual sophistication you want, but it comes down to the fact that it personally made you and others very unhappy. Why can't this be admitted?
>
>It seems the legitimacy of EPS' actions is being dictated by/tethered to personal effrontery here.
>
>Kevin