I can understand skepticism being engendered by the OP. I have no problem with being people being skeptical. But to allow one's skepticism to morph into rude accusations of dishonesty, without proof of same, is, IMHO, irresponsible. Many members expressed their skepticism without calling "BS," or "snake oil." Regrettably, a few couldn't wait for proof.

What you call "promoting" I see as "informing." I'll accept that the line between the two is thin, but to accuse Woofersus of promotion implies a knowledge of his intent, which, simply none of us can know. I sorta believe in "innocent until proved guilty." An outdated concept on the internet, I know, but I'm old fashioned. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

EDIT: I noticed you made a reference to Woofersus' post count. I sincerely hope you aren't implying that any conclusions should be drawn, about what is being said by someone, based on their low post count. I just noticed you have 21 posts. ;\)

For the record, though I understand the usefulness, I fear revealing post counts leads to just such abuse. It ain't the quantity that counts, it's the quality.

Last edited by Ajax; 09/24/08 02:46 PM. Reason: Addendum
Jack

"People generally quarrel because they cannot argue." - G. K. Chesterton