NetDoc:BTW, telling someone that they are acting like a jerk and calling someone a jerk are close but still worlds apart. Without even looking at my previous thread I am sure that I used the former, and not the later.
Wrong:
"Dweeb,
you chose to be a jerk"
Then, an ad hominem:
"The only real point that you have made is that you have zero patience and even fewer people skills"
AND THEN, in the same post:
"if you have anything to add to the original subject of the THREAD (humor acceptable) and not the personalities involved, please do so."
It's good to be the king, eh?
Here's an idea you might want to think about: leadership by example.
NetDoc:If I did not, then I apologise for being a jerk... won't be the first time, and it surely won't be the last time I have erred on this board or in real life.
Apology accepted - hopefully I won't be scarred for life by the experience, as you seem to think Andy will.
NetDoc:It just caused me pain to see people so willfully attacked for asking a question. Maybe somebody forgot their meds today???
Not me, but a good serotonin uptake inhibitor would help you with that pain.
NetDoc:If you want to attack someone for making an unsafe (or illegal) comment, I could almost understand that. If you take issue with someone presenting fallacious concepts or promoting something that you feel is wrong, I don't have as much of a problem with that.
I consider the implied endorsement of someone getting as far into diving as Andy has (I think he's a caver) without understanding such a basic concept is wildly unsafe. In another thread, Andy asks about the prospect of government regulation. I can see public questions about OW Module 1 material from cave divers being read as testimony on the Senate floor when they consider the SCUBA regulation bill.
NetDoc:But attacking someone for asking a question is not cool.
You know, I bet you, with a new username so no one knew what was happening, I could post some real questions that would get even you steaming. The statement that there are no stupid questions is a gross generalization, and gross generalizations almost always prove to be fallacies.
NetDoc:attack dog antics,
Attack dog antics? Reality calling.....
I suggested the question was a joke (as most others) and provided references for looking up the answer.
If that's your definition of "attack dog antics" I wonder how you manage to get by in the world.