Member Rara Avis
Sarcasm, Peter? I'm sure that wasn't Sharon's intent. I would prefer to think it was "more a general attempt at stoking the fire," as you so adroitly labeled your own sarcasm in this thread. Or maybe she was just making suggestions, as you did in pointing out our rules are "laughable" and follow "no form of logical reason?" Strangely, when we allow words to be twisted and labeled by subsequent declarations of intent, those words cease to have any real meaning, don't they?
I usually appreciate criticism as an opportunity to justify and reinforce our rules, and I always welcome suggestions as a chance to perhaps see something I previously missed or have since forgotten, but neither criticism nor suggestions warrant your increasingly hostile attitude, Peter. The very last thing I want to do is send the wrong message to others. I do not retaliate against people who criticizes our policies or decisions, because if either the policies or decisions can't withstand public scrutiny, they need to be changed. But criticism of a policy or decision is neither a get-out-of-jail-free card nor a license to continually break our rules. And wanton disregard for those rules, especially when accompanied by hostility and paranoia, WILL lead to repercussions.
There will be no further edits and no more moves to another forum for your work, Peter. They will simply be yanked by the first Moderator who feels you've once again broken our Guidelines. Peter posts, Moderator reads, Moderator pulls for just about any reason they want. We're not going to waste any more time discussing borderline infractions or your possible intent, nor will we bother with warnings or email messages you'll probably just ignore as you seem to have ignored the last one I sent to you.
Be happy, Peter. You will now be getting the special treatment you wanted.