25-02-2012, 02:58 PM
A simpler re-statement of the above would be appreciated, Ed.
I would ask that you elaborate clearly on the following portion of your post:
"Having been approached by one to participate in an encounter from which I demurred, but having participated in several similar events at non-DPF discussion boards -- I am compelled to ask publicly for a statement of intent and perception with regard to my participation here."
Are you asking us to bless you, or to clear you of some sort of charge?
Also, you note that,
"the predecessor thread terminated on a discussion of my suggestion[.]"
I am unaware of any thread "termination" to which you may be referring. Please elaborate. To which "suggestion" do you refer?
Also, I'm troubled by the inference you would have us draw that somehow you are being targeted for unfair treatment at DPF. I speak for myself and my partners when I tell you that your contributions to DPF are of immense value to our shared goals. You are a prized member of this forum.
Finally, you have the right to express dissatisfaction with the way DPF does business. Doing so not only does not diminish you in my eyes; it in fact enhances my respect for your mind and heart.
But if you are looking for a Columbo-style investigation of the attacks described herein and/or a Grand Jury-worthy bill of indictment against their perpetrators, then you need to enhance your understanding of how hostile operations such as those targeted against DPF are designed and executed.
Events are transpiring behind the scenes -- events which, for many valid reasons, owners of DPF must keep to themselves. You may doubt the veracity of this claim, and you may express that doubt here without fear of retribution.
But in the final analysis, DPF owners reserve the right to act in accordance with the dictates of our best, deep politics-informed judgment.
I would ask that you elaborate clearly on the following portion of your post:
"Having been approached by one to participate in an encounter from which I demurred, but having participated in several similar events at non-DPF discussion boards -- I am compelled to ask publicly for a statement of intent and perception with regard to my participation here."
Are you asking us to bless you, or to clear you of some sort of charge?
Also, you note that,
"the predecessor thread terminated on a discussion of my suggestion[.]"
I am unaware of any thread "termination" to which you may be referring. Please elaborate. To which "suggestion" do you refer?
Also, I'm troubled by the inference you would have us draw that somehow you are being targeted for unfair treatment at DPF. I speak for myself and my partners when I tell you that your contributions to DPF are of immense value to our shared goals. You are a prized member of this forum.
Finally, you have the right to express dissatisfaction with the way DPF does business. Doing so not only does not diminish you in my eyes; it in fact enhances my respect for your mind and heart.
But if you are looking for a Columbo-style investigation of the attacks described herein and/or a Grand Jury-worthy bill of indictment against their perpetrators, then you need to enhance your understanding of how hostile operations such as those targeted against DPF are designed and executed.
Events are transpiring behind the scenes -- events which, for many valid reasons, owners of DPF must keep to themselves. You may doubt the veracity of this claim, and you may express that doubt here without fear of retribution.
But in the final analysis, DPF owners reserve the right to act in accordance with the dictates of our best, deep politics-informed judgment.