request for moderation

[John Reimer]

anonymous wrote:
> I am glad you achieved balance,but here I do not think you are balanced.You offer legality to kris's personal attacks.
> 
> One thing from you I disagree:"I believe his hypocracy-crushing crusade is spewing shrapnel at many innocent bystanders and thus is creating a net-loss in the community atmosphere."You make this sounds like his so called crusade is in essence good,but only has a few side-effects.But it is not.It is not apropriate on this news group to acuse people of hypocrisy.And it is not apropriate to do personal attacks.You cause more harm because you offer kris the encouragment that he needs to continue his comportament.Evil actions are hard to justify so they thrive on others encouragment.
> 


Okay, I'm going to discontinue this conversation after this post. It's 
hard enough (and unfair) to have to converse with a faceless entity.

I offered no legality to his attacks.  I plainly disapproved of them in 
my post, and I certainly offered complete /discouragement/ of such 
activity throughout my post.  "Crusade" was never meant to imply 
approval -- it was meant to emphasize the severity and focus (in a very 
disapproving sense) of the activity.

You are doing one of three things here: (1) you are intentionally 
misunderstanding what I explained clearly in my post or (2) you are 
trying to instigate more discord here (as an anonymous poster), or (3) 
you honestly misunderstood my use of English.  For your own sake, I'll 
assume number 3 even though evidence doesn't appear to be pointing in 
that direction.

But, I think your contributions are becoming part of the problem, 
anonymous, and my responses to you are carrying it further.  So with 
that, I will shut up lest I end up becoming the hypocrite too. :)

-JJR