When you accuse someone of being a liar, or infer it, as you have me in the past, it DOES become a personal attack.

Polling hint:

In a poll the question should be neutral, the answers are where you get to inject the hyperbole.

I remember Vision Hooks Aunty...

I remember how you publicly called me and my friend liars...how you used the same low brow tactics you and grandpa used in this thread (insinuation, accusations of a 'hidden agenda' etc etc ad nauseum) to try to discredit me in that one. Maybe it worked, maybe it didn't...

What I continue to think is funny is that you are quite sure you feel like you come out looking like a winner in these conversations when in fact what happens is, the below the belt tactics you use diminish the effectiveness of whatever fair points you have to make in the debate.

Here is a paraphrased example of what I mean....

You accused WT of only working against the hatchery issues, Ramon counters by saying that's unfair, we've worked on this issue here and the other issue there. Instead of revisiting your erroneous statement and acknowledging its inaccuracy, or at least taking a step backward, you ignore the point fairly made.

That WT strikes fear into the hearts of those hell bent on harvest at any cost, including the costs to native fishes, is exactly why they are important to have around. If nothing else when these subjects arise it helps illustrate how weak and pathetic the arguments of hatchery at any cost' proponents really are.

That is not to say that I don't listen with open ears when Smalma and Ramon delineate the differences the between their positions...certainly a conversation of that magnitude would be one that we can all take something from....