>>>[snip]
>>>>With the great sensitivity around this place right now I'd like to see one more "rule" added to the UT's set of rules. What I think is almost necessary is that anyone who is "offended" by a message ought to be required to declare the offensiveness first to the writer directly in a response to the particular offensive message.
>>>[snip]
>>>
>>>But that's my point. JVP is no longer able to send a response..
>>
>>But you missed my point - that JohnP was told the SAME things many times directly where he had clear opportunity to respond (and did).
>
>>As for the new rule I would like to see... JohnP has no opportunity to see the message either, so he cannot lodge a complaint (and my point is the complainer needs to declare himself to the writer FIRST, if only to give the writer a chance to apologize formally).
>[snip]
>
>Again, that's what I mean, that's my point. JVP cannot complain anymore to you, the writer.

This is why I say you are "overboard" with this.
I was talking to Jay and Rodman, not to JohnP. What I said to both Renoir and Rod was the same thing that I have said to JohnP himself on many occasions. So there was nothing "new" except the recipients.
In other words, JohnP's defense(s) against my statements is already on the record for all and sundry to see. The characterizations I repeated, specifically in my reply to Rod, were necessary to show how *I* believe Rod's "requests" would ultimately be UNproductive anyway.

Jim