[chris8886]

Originally Posted by Ruffy

I see myself in the mirror on this on occasion - I know I'm an opinionated git at times.

But I hope I usually fall within Trev's set and, yes, I agree the org is a more balanced place than most on the web.

Surely the point of debate is to try to find out what is right, not to be right? Sad that the process has been corrupted nowadays in the rush for instant gratification, popularity or publicity. I consider myself a scientist - I query and challenge for understanding, not to demand my point be accepted (though sometimes it turns out I am fortunate enough to be close to the best truth). Also, I often play devil's advocate to deliberately present alternatives that I may not agree with personally. Sometimes overtly, sometimes covertly. I try hard to generally remain open to the possibility that I am wrong a lot of the time. (Although it probably doesn't always come across that way - my natural style is not 'shouty, shouty' but I've had to adapt to the way of the modern world and I know I'm not very good at it!)

And it's comments and concessions like this, that make this place so good.