]No Zone... It isn't "All Good" nor am I certain why YOU felt the need to insert yourself into the into the scenario, but since you did... here goes.
There are rules on CM regarding blatant personal attacks. Since I was not addressing Popclick in this particular thread, nor in the others she "grabbed" words from to support her "case" against me... she
has broken the rules. Popclick is the one who initiated the controversy by inserting herself into a
public admonishment of another member with her own comment which was plainly directed at me (post #25).
My Response to her (post#57) included an assortment of contextual applications and was intended by me
to close the matter. Howbeit,Popclick decided to continue pursuing and making argument for the matter,
thus disclosing the "nature" of her railing by harvesting a short phrase and two words from other posts
made by me, from at least two different forums and three seperate threads, none of which were directed to her.
Popclick's method of operation in this scenario;
1)being the initiator
2)having no defense that I specifically invited her comments
3)having aggressively pursued the issue and promoted her agenda after I made effort to quash it.
4)demonstrated an intention to seek an opportunity, over a period of time with assorted posts
5)fabricated a cause in an attempt to ridicule publicly
....if that does not fit the definition of "blatant personal attack"... I don't know what would.
It's not my habit to hold grudges, I make intentinal effort to READ posts and interpret them by the
words without adding to what is written. I don't feel the least bit bad about being considered
"abbrasive".. though it seems clear that Popcick's implication was meant to accuse, judge and ridicule
me personally, as opposed to the dialogue scenarios she captured my words from. In doing, so Popclick
has violated Matt.7:1-5, the beam in Popclick's eye is her "attack" upon me. She is 25, I am 45,
Popclick violates the God ordained scriptural principals of order and authority, the fact that she
inserted herself and thus created the conflict... just adds to her insubordinate conduct within the
context of Christian fellowship here at CC.
I am delighted that my comments have caused some to feel "chaffed"... it tells me the Spirit is at work.
I am not sorry someone feels "abraded". I am not immune to this occurence, however, I do make effort
to examine the cause of my irritation and consider if making argument will hold up in the light of
scripture before taking a stand. If anyone feels "offended" by comments CC has a policy 1)Don't open
them, 2) don't reply to them or report it. Popclick also ignored this very practical and authoritative advice. Regarding the report scenario...anybody can do that... I have confidence the moderators can discern the difference between "judging and action or incident" and attempting to vilify another with a personal attack.
So there ya go, Zone, I am going to simply suppose that your purpose for inserting yourself into this
scenario was an effort to be peacemaker. I am disappointed by your broad brush method. I am not a "go along to get along person", I do believe such negates Christian integrity. I could continue to state my case further but feel I have covered the pertainent issues adequately for the audience sake. I am unimpressed by your opinion here and do stand firm that Popclick should apologize for her offense. I also re-interate my previous conclusion to leave her to her fruit.[/COLOR]