"Often"? Nope, still paranoid.

In my own defense
 

My apology was sincere. I stepped in the middle of an ongoing 100+ page discussion and misinterpreted what "old tired arguments" meant.

I apologized and retreated. That's all I can do.

Sorry about that. I'll tread more carefully in future.

--t

I have to say I find this petty and offensive. I am here, then I disappear for a while and then I'm back. Do you seriously mean that if someone hasn't been around much that their opinion and/or insight is any less valid and by implication, yours is superior? And if they are wrong they are attacked even if they apologize? Really? Because excuse me, you don't always know what the hell you're talking about either and I have never seen someone essentially say, "go away, we don't give a f**k what you think." I may not be around enough in your eyes to have a valid opinion but I'll give it to you anyway. This was incredibly rude (and before you say so, I don't give a s**t if he was mistaken, my statement stands). Wow.

I'd also point out that in this post you are perpetuating that which you claim to despise. You might want to think about that.

Take that back!

26 posts, vs over 1k. Huge difference. Jumping in to the middle of a board dynamic discussion vs. a political (or other) discussion. Huge difference. Reread what I said. I'm not saying what you think I'm saying and I stand by it. Be offended if you want. I'm tired of the same damn horse being beaten in this thread. It's nearly impossible to have a poltiical discussion because the poor horse is dragged out by someone sooner rather than later and we are back to where we started.

You are saying that if you don't have a high enough post count you have no right to form opinions/comment on board dynamics. In this thread, you don't have to be rocket scientist to figure the general dynamics out. But that's immaterial. My point is your statement was incredibly rude.

I stand by that.

Oh, and I agree with one thing; the same dead horse is dragged out time and time again...only for me that dead horse is the inevitable bitching about said dead horse.

For BTD: I actually said much the same earlier in the thread, but stupidly bit again. Still, I actually do not remember a time when we didn't all bicker and argue over politics here at the LoT. :D
Btw- when a person apologizes in a sincere manner, it's common courtesy to accept the apology, or ignore it. Tod, as a fellow member of the LoT, I welcome your input and I am not totally sure I understand why your original apology was apparantly not sufficient (especially when I'm not sure it was needed), but please continue to contribute to any conversations we have going. Lord knows I don't read everything around here, yet I jump in and out of conversations all the time.

We're all friends- believe it or not, as much as we argue, I like Scaeagles- mainly because I know it irritates him. ;):p

Oh, and I'm going to rename this the "JW, Wendybeth and Scaeagles Poking Thread'. Uhm, on second thought..... maybe not. Sounds kind of dirty.

1. I get what you're saying, BTD... I think. From my perspective, it depends on whether LoT is a local, Los Angeles area-based club for people in their 20's and 30's who socialize with each other IRL or whether it's a message board open to everyone. If it's a message board open to everyone, some nuances are going to slip through the cracks and that's going to have to be okay.

As long as I've been hanging around the fringes, my jury's still out on what the LoT is, you enigmatic darlings.

2. The Wall Street Journal is a damn fine newspaper but only if you ignore the editorials.