I guess the best approach is to deal with this on a point by point basis.
To your first point:I was simply applying djcraig's methodology for assessing a person's worth on him. His reaction indicated how much he enjoyed it. No sarcasm, just returning in kind; a huge and obvious difference.
On your second point: totally innocent, and as such that is how I plead. Rotator even gave an explanation for all to see. I merely asked why he recanted his original post to which I had typed a reply. Once I posted my response, I noticed his post was missing. I assumed he deleted it. By doing so, my response to his now non-existent post looked out of place, so I deleted my post. No sooner than I had done that, his new post appeared, hence my second post. As I stated - totally innocent, and does nothing to support your smug Mr. Rogers theory.
As for the approved list comment, just who determines who can sing what song? It's a valid question, and one which deserved to be asked since the clear implication was that Ms. Dion was somehow not entitled to or unworthy to sing the AC/DC anthem.
Which brings us to your last piece of evidentiary material, Philip's comments. Most distasteful coming from somebody who should be more in tune with the art of another. I'm sure if I were to look at one of Philip's photographs and pass some disparaging remarks, he wouldn't appreciate it. My comments were intended to appeal to his sense of artistic appreciation.
So in answer to your last question, no, I'm not kidding. For you to present so weak a case against me I might well ask you the very same thing: Are YOU kidding?
