Difficult as that may be, imagine what it's like in politics, when by definition people are opponents!

In the New Jersey Gubernatorial race, the Republican challenging the incumbent governor said he wouldn't stoop to personal attacks .. and he has kept on message. However the incumbent governor's campaign has even stooped to attack the opponent's weight! They also attacked a $46K loan the Republican made to a coworker .. but the Republican campaign refrained from reminding everyone that the governor loaned a former girl friend almost a half million $ .. which he later just forgave, and gave her a multi-million "settlement" after they broke up .. and she was head of a major state union at the time!

If a candidate believes they can do much better for the voters, than the opponent, don't they have an obligation to remind the voters of ALL the facts .. not just those presented by those who don't choose to take the high road?

For my troubles as a moderator, I have been accused of not being "neutral" and "heavy handed" and "violated TOS" all without specifics or proof.  And that was by my "friends."

But I remain confident in my judgements and actions having documented the cause and my reasoning as I have done for many years in my business life.

As a group moderator, I will not "fight fire with fire" and on a personal level, I do not believe in this philsophy when dealing with a problem or a person.  I opt for an appeal to the offender to see my point or their failing, referral to a higher authority or to tender my resignation after exhausting the first two solutions.

Farewell and Peace, Duane(OF)

Whether it is justified or not is debatable, but either way, it is just human nature to, at a certain point, feel the need to 'fight back'.