I am saddened by your unprincipled way in which you monitor your site.
It is one thing for me to admonish Fran for what I perceived to be a petty comment but it is quite another for you to ignore personal attacks clothed in sarcasm and then rationalize them as side disputes.
Anyway, the standard to judge a comment is not quite the same at the beginning of a thread, when it is an overreaction to something that might be innocuous (or not), than after a 50-comment thread of "vigorous" discussion, where you generated, rightly or wrongly, a lot of hostility from several posters.
You chose to feel insulted by Fran's innocent question/request, lashed out and were unhappy to be called on it. Now you are again choosing to feel smeared here. To which I can only say: choose differently. Then I'll change my standards towards you. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
For regulars here, Fran is a committed treasure of blogging, who never has a harsh word for anyone - only queries. It is not surprising that some Don Quixotes (and if Daily Tossers are called Kossaks, then why shouldn't we be called Quixotes?), would rise gallantly to her defence. We ET males are, mostly, gentlemen.
I think both sides were unaware of the two-sided context of misunderstanding. I suggest that we draw a line under it and begin again. You can't be me, I'm taken
I only bring this up , not because I am offended by his comment ( I have much harder skin than to worry about a 'toff' like Ted) but to expose the double standard which you seem to modrate the site by. Your rationale of his comment being the 50th and not the 1st is not valid. Personal character assasination should not be tolerated at any time.
He should have been told this and possibly have his posting of his photographs suspended from appeaing on the site for a month with the exception of those photographs of his wife :-)
