The simple fact of the matter is, had the poster provided credentials, and or reasonable references backing his claims the response would have been completely different. Most members on this site appreciate previously unknown information and different insights. The thing is, if it is presented as fact, it has to be based on fact.
If it is not fact, or is maybe speculation, that to a degree is also tolerated, even appreciated, so long as it is presented as such. For instance, when Navantias unsolicited offer was first reported it generated a lot of discussion and speculation, here and elsewhere. As it became obvious there was little official interest, the topic died down, reaching the point that, failing any additional announcements, further discussion or speculation served no purpose.
Saying something over and over again, doesn't make it true, nor does posting the same disputed links over and over.
Attacking and condescendingly engaging with those who provide inconvenient facts that disprove or undermine the arguments being made is in itself rude. As is cherry picking and misrepresenting context or facts to give the impression that something that is true is untrue.
Formal complaints were lodged against me by a couple of members who had made untrue, condescending, inflamitory, and somewhat personal attacks on me. I committed the sin of biting back, which apparently hurt some feeling which lead to more complaints.
This matter was dealt with by the mods. Those involved, including myself, were counceled, the matter should be closed. Instead the sniping and oneupsmanship continues. There is a distinct stench of "don't you know who I am".
The recent carryon reminds me of a colleague who was facing an extremely frustrating situation where he had blocked closing a safety related matter because the proposed solution did not work.
He was subjected to bullying and threats from those attempting to get him to sign off. Long after the matter was sorted, they continued their attacks on him. He laid it out to me perfectly when he said, (he was a baby boomer himself) that he would rather put up with baby boomer, toddler temper tantrums, than fail to prevent someone being killed or injured.
The thing is, those attacking him, accused him of being a toxic bully, someone who had to be removed and punished. These so called professionals, were more concerned about being told no, having their authority questioned, than they were about the safely of their people.