Sorry, George, but I **HAVE** to post FOR THE RECORD...

Firstly, suddenly 2 "phrases" used quite some time ago cause this sudden rage in you? Boy, that's unfortunate!

Secondly, would you do me the favour and tell me what it is that I am "wrong" about? If it's the use of that "phrase" some time ago and my lack of apology then I can only take your current attitude as, again, unfortunate. If it's because Michel "put it in the bit bucket.." then maybe, just maybe, you are wrong! Your virginal ears can withstand such words if you'll only give them a chance.

Now, on to the "meat" of the issue - your prior post of drivel and lies:
You said: "I never, ever say anything on-line that I wouldn't say to someone F2F. It's part of where I grew up.". Probably true if you don't include UT Private message threats as "online".

You said: "I'd also say that I've no "vendetta".". No "vendetta? HA! What a load of bull. 2+ years ago you started being awfully snarky/snide/even insulting in responses to many of my posts. I answered in kind, as I am wont to do. Soon I got a UT Private from you warning me to shut up or you'd 'say things online that I surely wouldn't like'. I told you that I had no idea of what you were talking about and told you to go ahead so that I could find out too. You didn't. The crapola responses continued and I continued in kind. Then came the same UT Private a month or two later. Same result from my side, and yours. The crapola continued. But this time, as well as answering in kind, you were forced to "out" the problem. Finally the source of the VENDETTA became clear. For the record you had found out that I had made a sustained effort to stop Ed Rauh's INSULTS (to multiple people besides me) by having him barred from the UT. (Note, by the way, that Michel "turned a blind eye" there but that one's OK!??)

You said: "What my problem was with this thread was fairly simple. Jim was complaining about someone's comportment.". You know, George, I was not complaining in that thread (this one, by the way) about "someone's" comportment. For the record, I was describing a certain "style" of comportment and SUGGESTING to the reader that if they felt that kind of comportment was not helpful and knew of any member who might exhibit such, they should bring it to the attention of UT management.
As regards my own behaviour here, how is it that you are so sure that anything I've said here ended up in "Michel's bit-bucket"? You have no idea as to whether that is true or not.
If anyone had tried to get me barred, I wouldn't know it and neither would you. So don't jump to conclusions my dear friend.
Maybe, in my 2 - count them: 2!!! - uses of a certain phrase the context was considered when UT management reviewed them or when possible complainants considered registering a complaint. You have no idea and neither do I.
And I don't think you can come close to accusing me of the style of comportment that I was writing about.

You said: "I've no problem with Jim expressing his opinions. I do have a problem with anyone that indulges in the level of hypocrisy that he has.".
And just where is that hypocrisy demonstrated, George?
Wanna talk about something approaching hypocrisy... your twisting my message to serve as a vehicle to toss a cheap-shot while you say there is no vendetta! Now that's hypocrisy. My message told no one HOW TO BEHAVE. It did describe a behaviour and suggested an action if people felt such behaviour was not helpful.

Your amply demonstrated hypocrisy includes your saying that there is no vendetta, your tolerance (and even 'encouragement', once you festering vendetta was exposed) of Ed Rauh's countless insults, your continued belittlement of the contributions of certain invididuals while all the while painting yourself as the master developer who is beyond reproach. You seem to conveniently forget all the times you've belittled people in your comments. Is that because you didn't use any contraband words to hurl your insults or because you are exempt for some reason?

Get real, George. Your vendetta is groundless - without merit - and should be put to rest as soon as possible. I'll be jumping in the next time you use your snide tone in a reply to members in you 'got no use for them' list.

Jim

>>George,
>>
>>Rather than post a reply to this drivel I thought I'd offer you the option to retract what you say here.
>>
>Jim,
>
>Nope! I won't. Here's the problem. On two different occasions you used "that phrase" in response to a technical post. Regardless of who was correct there is no place for that kind of language here. None, zip, nada. And further, there's no justification for it. In fact, in one of those two instances, the post wasn't a reply to one of your's. IIRC, you never apologized to either of the people.
>
>In something that's non-technical, I might be able to understand. We let our lesser self take over. Yet, in this case, you want Michel to take some action about someone else's "opinion". Not technical at all.
>
>My late father once told me this. "If you're going to be man enough to stand up and fight for what you believe in, then be man enough to apologize if you're wrong." You're wrong here yet you remain completely unapologetic.
>
>Finally, who died and left you in charge of how we comport ourselves? No one! You've attacked me, you've mis-quoted me, you've taken what I've said out of context. I won't post back. I won't post to you. Kindly do me the favor of doing the same. In my mind you're a...(I won't finish this phrase.)