Can't be arsed PH. They are there. Both times you were called on them. You tried to be clever and brush it off as our interpretation of what you typed. Not clever enough though because I'd be surprised if there are more than two or three members here who didn't think you made those references, veiled or not.Panama Hat wrote:Would you, please, be so kind as to show me where I accused him (or is it now plural, baloo???) of being one? Or the many board members now.
There is no circling of wagons. You throw personal insults around in a place where it's very very rare to get personal even in the most heated debates. It's only natural for the members to take exception to your schoolboy name calling, they don't like it here, they don't want it here.
Seeing we're such a diverse bunch here, I think it shows that most here saw the comment for what it was. It wasn't an insult, vile or vulgar. It was flippant remark about toughening up. Any swear words used were not directed at the child in any way shape or form.What I find quite frightening is that, one poster aside, the other members here find it acceptable that children are referred to as FB did . . .
But hey, if it was that offensive to you, sue. You might be able to get His and Hers matching Audis.
![[smilie=rotflmao.gif]](./images/smilies/rotflmao.gif "rotflmao"){kind=small}
) who posted a pic of himself and his lovely wife, several pics and a video 
of his home in the centre of a major city, exact location next to an embassy, then a few days later announced he was going on holiday for a month - aaaarkkkkk. People don't always think do they?
