I went to the trouble of reading a long thread at your initiation because you suggested it presented evidence of Chris' perfidy.  I wrote a substantial and argued  response in which I suggested that Jerome had initiated any ad hominem comments which appeared on that thread.  I invited you to confirm that you, as a frontpager, do not support frontpagers initiating ad hominem attacks against ET members.

And your response...

You suggest that Chris might have had an ulterior motive for posting a quotation he posted on this thread. Perhaps he does, perhaps you can ask him.  Having an ulterior motive is not a hanging offence.  Were similar accusations not also made against Sven?  Are you scanning the pages of ET for any comment by anyone which might possibly, if interpreted in another context, be construed as containing a veiled critical reference to a front pager?

However my concern is that the thread you cite as an example of Chris' bad behaviour instead indicates to me (a disinterested party - before you ascribe ulterior motives to me) that an ad hominem attack was initiated by a frontpager against a member.

You don't seem to see that as a problem or worthy of comment.

Can you not see that this would appear to justify the accusation, made by other members, of frontpagers "ganging up on ordinary members", of frontpagers having one standard for ordinary members and a lower one for themselves?

We appear to have front pagers acting as Judge, jury, prosecuting council, witness and complainant in this instance.  The society we so like to criticise on these pages has long learned to separate those roles and appears to have a much better developed sense of natural justice.

It seems that ET is good at lecturing others but cannot provide the most elementary standards of justice and fair play to its own members.

I am disgusted that you seem to think that this is just another opportunity for point scoring against Chris.  Have you no concept of Solveig's rights to her good name and ordinary common decency, courtesy and good manners in this matter?  I have never known her to behave without courtesy to others on this blog, and the least she deserves is an apology.

But I suppose that would require someone to admit that it is possible that they might be wrong on a rare occasion.

notes from no w here