"Jose" wrote in message
. com...
Your "somewhat wrong"analysis of his posts are from your point of view.

The point that evoked my contribution was a statement that a certain statement
that he made was "utter nonsense". It was not untter nonsense. His POV may
be utter nonsense, but the statement he made was somewhat wrong, and somewhat
right. I'm responding to the statement, not the person.


And I'm responding, saying his statement was NOT somewhat right, but instead, it
was all wrong, and utter nonsense.

There is never a good reason for an ad hominum attack.

The furthest I have gone is making statements about points in his post, but I
did go as far as calling him a troll. Other than that, my language has been
above board, and I have spoken to statements. Period. Calling him a troll is
true, and necessary.

It won't work. It's what trolls want. By your analysis, it's what he wants.

Yes, I know that is what trolls want. I will have to deal with that, and accept
that unfortunate fact, but the real goal is to make everyone, and I do mean
everyone, in the group realize that he is troll, not worthy of a response when
he posts.

Ok, then make =that= point.

Have you been reading for comprehension? I have made that point, on nearly
every post in this thread. Look back, to verify.

I'm not. What I'm having a problem with is condemning statements =just=
because they are his, and the ad hominum attacks. If anybody else had made
the statement about autopilots, it would not have garnered the response "utter
rubbish".

I am responding his statements, not just because they are from him. You are not
in my head. Again, I call him a troll, because it is true and necessary.

With someone else, there might be a more civil discussion, but we know from
history, that is not possible with this person.

Still, arguing about the autopilot is not what the subject was. He is
deflecteng the discussion away from FADEC, because his argument is unwinable.
--
Jim in NC