Actually, I hadn't seen that, apologies.

But your entire argument falls down with the suggestion that I never pull him up on his behaviour. Which is factually wrong.

I agree that, given the personal history, pants shouldn't be so quick to throw the insults about.

Irrespective of that, however - is ANY post (which quite clearly wasn't banter) hoping someone has OD'd acceptable behaviour?

So, I ask you again - do you condone SCC's post above? Because I would suggest that equivalence, and a legitimate moral compass, dictates you come down on him in the same manner as you did the other day, as you would had the roles been reversed.

I think the phrase is "What's good for the goose is good for the gander"...

Posted By: Arganth, Dec 17, 13:49:39