Although I still think it was in extremely bad taste (at the very least) to essentially attack you in your own journal, it seems that the original inflammatory comment to which I responded wasn't so far off the mark after all.
Yes and no. Which inflammatory comment? There was one that was nothing short of quite nasty. There was another which was not nasty but which was attacking in nature (and I think we agree on the propriety of using someone's personal journal to slam them) which may be the one that you responded to. And the follow up to your reply, in essence stating that Brian will never change, he's a hoplessly manipulative schmuck, was off the mark. (It was phrased as "I have never seen any evidence of change..." but implied "....and there is not likely to ever be any, either.") And the continuing insistence of some other parties to refuse to allow Brian any opportunity to demonstrate change -- i.e., with the episode in August -- is not his responsibility.
Re: good insights
Yes and no. Which inflammatory comment? There was one that was nothing short of quite nasty. There was another which was not nasty but which was attacking in nature (and I think we agree on the propriety of using someone's personal journal to slam them) which may be the one that you responded to. And the follow up to your reply, in essence stating that Brian will never change, he's a hoplessly manipulative schmuck, was off the mark. (It was phrased as "I have never seen any evidence of change..." but implied "....and there is not likely to ever be any, either.") And the continuing insistence of some other parties to refuse to allow Brian any opportunity to demonstrate change -- i.e., with the episode in August -- is not his responsibility.