Brent, your petulance did not move the argument forward.

[Brent]

I just feel so relieved that charles has taken on the role of "Avatar Policeman". As soon as he forwards us Volumes 1 through 3 of the Official Avatar Guidelines we can all work on getting into compliance. ;)

But I will say that even though he's a pompous gas-bag, it's good to know that there are still people like him who have enough free time to micro-manage everyone else's life.

[FatherTime]

I made up seven avatars for the site.  I have them zipped up and ready for delivery but where do I send them.  I will make more from time to time if it helps.

[sweetnsad]

I can't help but wonder WHY???  What the heck is dear ole Charlie trying to prove here...that Brent is wicked???  That Brent is a bad, bad man??  LOL...Give me a break...at least when Brent has something to say we can ALL understand HIS english....:-)

[kiddosmom]

I come to this site for information, and YES to 'bond' with others who are understanding of my plight. I do not plan to put anyone down, and I am aggrivated that anyone is attacking others on this site. Everyone has a right to their opinion. You are all correct, if you do not like what someone has to say simply IGNORE them, as I am doing.
Brent is a big boy, if he wishes to interact with this --ummmm-- person that is his right as he is the one being attacked.
I have stated my support of Brent, and I hope that is enough for him.

I am now going to ignore any further post from said named (moron) I mean Sparc ID of Charles.

[Peanutsdad]

>Brent, I am somewhat disappointed in your post. Just when I
>thought we were making progress in promoting a kinder, gentler
>image for you (and you have made progress), you are showing a
>hint of backsliding to some of your old habits. You know, one
>indication of an evolving intellect is its ability to learn
>from its mistakes. We must both continue to assess our
>progress in that area.

Good, I'd hate to think that anyone would post to your approval.
>
>I concede to you one point. You are correct in your proposal
>that I did not read six months of posts, though it was not for
>my lack of trying. While attempting to re-read your prior
>posts, I selected the listing option to retrieve six months of
>posts. It delivered five pages of threads. Focused on content
>as I was, I neglected to note the posting dates. Consequently,
>I assumed that there were six months of posts when there were
>really only about two months. Attention to detail is always of
>great importance, and I dutifully acknowledge my error. But it
>was an error of neglect rather than of deceit. None-the-less,
>your point was well taken.

Is this your BS way of saying, Ok, Im full of shit and you guys called me on it?
>
>Now as far as some of your less constructive comments, it is
>important to keep in mind that an insult is never effective
>unless it is accepted by the intended party. After thirty-six
>years of witnessing the ungodly things that parents say to
>each other and to their children, I developed early an
>immunity to such invective, especially coming from strangers,
>and even more so when delivered in this environment.

Amen to that. Good, God forbid you should actually see yourself as you are.
>
>There is a measure of people who use such boards as this as a
>sort of "bonding" ritual, seeking affirmation of self-worth by
>having their opinions accepted at face value. They would take
>your unkind remarks as a sign of personal rejection, which
>would in turn impact their self-esteem. I cannot be counted
>among that number. Rather, I am among those who visit for
>useful information and for the occasional exchange of ideas,
>accompanied by their intellectual debate.

No, as my old English teacher would put it, you sir, are entirely too wordy. While you may not believe it, it is possible to exchange ideas without writing an entire book.
>
>As you know, not all ideas are created equal. Everyone is
>entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts. Thus,
>those proposals with less than stellar merit deserve to be
>challenged and reworked until they can stand the litmus test
>for validity. That is how we learn to separate good ideas from
>bad ones. We can count upon good ideas to give us a strong
>foundation for our thinking and for our lives. Bad ideas will
>always lead us down a treacherous path.

What you refer to is the scientific method. See? simple to say. Another time, I'll debate treacherous paths.....remember Hiroshima? What I count on is common sense, unfortunately, it cant be taught.
>
>I will be presumptuous in making the following suggestion. You
>might find it beneficial to practice graciousness in accepting
>kudos for doing the right thing.  Sometimes such recognition
>is offered less often than deserved, so rejecting it seems to
>me to be imprudent. But that, of course, is only my opinion.

Yes, you are presumptuous, and pompous.
>
>And finally, one reflective observation... should someone choose
>to adopt the role of a paladin fighting righteously for
>fairness and equity, then one's avatar should reflect that
>moral initiative. While "Mr. Smith" certainly portrays an
>aggressive image, he exemplifies bad programming from start to
>finish. A better choice as a paradigm for "fighting the good
>fight" might, instead, be "Neo".

I see, we got our favorite dictionary out again didn't we Charles? Put it away, it's not doing you any good. Good lord man,, come down out of the clouds.
>
>I leave you with the following quotation that might strike you
>more positively than my signature.
>
>"Not a day passes over this earth but men and women of no
>note
>do great deeds, speak great words, and suffer noble sorrows."
>>Charles Reed<
>
>It is not our abilities that show what we truly are. It is our
>choices.
>>A. Dumbledore<

So you are leaving? Thank you.