Point of fact: I never contest that Richard shouldn't be banned for his actions. He was also guilty of personal attacks on people. That however does not then permit people to personally attack him. *This random argument you introduce is a red herring to distract from the original point made. Let's try to avoid doing that from now on yeah?

Point of fact: That thread is based on a first blood post where he calls the individual those things, not that RL motivation was those things. RL did not make that thread, RL did not comment on that thread. The user chose to call him those things.

Point of Fact: A personal attack is defined in most places as an attack on an individual instead of an evaluation of their comments or arguments. Calling someone abusive and cruel spirited does nothing to answer the points they make and does indeed fall under that definition.

I don't care about the user not being banned but why is the comment not deleted and a warning attached to it? He doesn't say hes mean he says hes cruel spirited, its another degree to which he takes the argument hence me saying the difference between calling someone stupid versus calling them retarded. One would be accepted the other would not.

* indicates the edit made