Originally Posted by Fiftydriver
It is also curious why you are so heated at defending him.
Not trying to make a friend with anyone here so not sure what your comments are referring to. There are about a dozen posters on this thread, including you, that are doing nothing but throwing the same things back and forth over and over. That is certainly helpful and you are also done yourself proud in doing nothing but stoking the flames at every turn with the same comments and I do not really understand what dog you have in the fight.
THERE IS NO FIGHT,
My interest in this Thread should be clear to anyone that's read my posts in the context of those member's posts and statements I've responded to. If it's not clear from my posts, it should be clear from other member's posts that have joined in the defense of stenger's right to express his experience and opinion on the performance of a hunting bullet. I have to presume you don't understand, otherwise there shouldn't be any purpose for questioning why "I'm so heated at defending him". My first response to your characterization me being heated at defending him, would be to inform you that I'm defending his right to share an experience about a bullet's performance with the membership, and his opinion about that performance. If your claim is that I'm defending him in any other sense, then you'll have to describe your claim with some further clarity.
You expressed curiosity of my involvement, and also now criticized my prolonged involvement in this Thread. In the effort to satisfy your curiosity, I respond to you now. There's a prolonged established history of transforming any member's post describing and sharing a poor experience with a Berger bullet into a negative critique of that member, rather than a neutral discussion of the bullet performance experienced. The consequence of shifting the focus of the discussion from the bullet performance experience to interrogation and criticism of the member that posted the information leads to either naturally defensive responses from the member, or more commonly the stifling and silencing of that member. And it's as simple as that.
I've countered those members that elected to shift the discussion from bullet performance, to a negative critique of the stenger. I had no doubts about the direction this thread would turn beginning with my first popcorn post. Broz likes the popcorn when he controlling the direction and content of the Threads. Doesn't care for its taste when he's not.
If you're finding me responding to your Posts on this Thread, now you should be able to understand why. This is the first Thread that I've observed you become part of this established and predictable response pattern of focusing negativity and criticism onto the member (stenger), rather than responding to the bullet performance he came here to discuss and share with us.
So I self-analyzed my purpose for involvement in this Thread at the time I chose to participate in it. Have you done likewise?
In your abbreviated quote (above), you state you really don't understand what dog I have in this fight. If you don't understand my interest in this Thread now, you may never be capable of understanding it. But to express my curiosity, you first characterize this Thread as a fight, and then immediately emphatically re-characterize it with "THERE IS NO FIGHT". What's up with that?
Even though you apparently believe you've been a neutral, helpful participant in responding to stenger and this Thread he initiated, perhaps you'll be able to recognize the effect of your Posts on stenger; how they've been interpreted and their affect, by taking a look-see at stenger's direct response to you:
Originally Posted by stenger
I think you should stick to building rifles instead of acusing me of making up a story.
Good luck this season.
So no matter how intently you've concluded that your Posts in this Thread have been void of personal attack and accusation, the member you've directed your comments to has just clearly communicated to you, his own interpretation of them.