Airborneguy

1. I didn't start this thread, check that one real quick.

2. Where were you taught that "fact sheets" are required when stating your opinion in a PUBLIC FORUM

3. This link beloew does mention insurance and property damage as a reason for effective management of deer populations.

http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/d...er/ndmgfin.pdf

No please, go back to parting the Red Sea and take a quick look in the dictionary under "opinion".

Phade

OMG, seriously. Stop, this is foolish.

Your answers:

1. Show me where I said you started this thread, and what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

2. You never stated it was your opinion until after I asked you for a link, factsheet, etc. offering information on it. Again, when other members are interested in a topic, and ask for a link, factsheet etc. people often reply with one, as you did. It's not that hard of a concept there buddy. Once you said it was your opinion, that changed things, but then again you said that AFTER the original post.

3. That's worth inspecting. However, the statements indicate that as physical issue as well.

Airborneguy

"Once you said it was your opinion, that changed things, but then again you said that AFTER the original post. "

And I did, and that should have been the end of this. You're calling me foolish? Re-read the timeline of this conversation. At any moment you can stop talking to me, I actually welcome that. I'll even let you have the last word since that seems to be the problem, so fire away.

I believe that the problem is that I failed to take your bait and get hysterical when you attacked me and my forum, and that is bothering you.

Phade

I'm amazed. Simply amazed. I bow to your wisdom. I'll end this discussion on my part as well. While I said you forum was lowly, and non-attended, notice a sentence later that I acknowledged what you and your forum was doing is a good thing. Every forum is lowly and non-attended when it first starts out. Was it a bait? No. It was advice.

The timeline shows I've attempted to stay on topic of the thread. You have directed conversation at me not related to this thread, just as I did with your forum. Seems you like to call the kettle black, Mr. Pot. For the record, I never called you foolish, that's in your head.

Again, back on topic (for the final time hopefully). TO THE THREAD STARTER! (notice that's not you airborne, okay? I don't want you to get confused and say I accused you of starting a thread!)

Another question I have on the forestry issue is the inspection of the tree health issues. Who maintains records on the outbreaks (like the blight)? The general health of the forest could be revealed in a manner that the DEC or park service would be inclined to act.

jf5

Guys, bickering won't help your deer herd. Not trying to be the ref, but lets get it back on topic here...

Phade

I believe we are there. I've spoken with the thread starter on this.

SteveBNy

Opinions backed by fact carry the most weight and receive the most consideration - as least to me. Opinion that seemed to be pulled out of the air or from popular perpetuated myths are ignored with a shake of the head.

Steve

Airborneguy

Then it should have been ignored, that would have been fine by me. I checked the rules by the way, no where did it say that one is discouraged from offerring an opinion on a public thread in the forum.