>"It only started a bit of a fire in this case" is obviously not a good argument, especially when the fire department showed up to contain it. You didn't conta

>"It only started a bit of a fire in this case" is obviously not a good argument, especially when the fire department showed up to contain it. You didn't contain anything. You didn't even respond to the subthread where people were were actually starting fires. You just threw a warning at me after most of the conversation already played out. Not only did a fire not happen, you showed up after most people left the premises. >I'm sorry, but I have to pull rank about this, Go ahead and pull rank man. You can even ban me if you wanted to, it's your right. I'm not trying to say anything to the contrary. The servers are based in the states, but they're private property so you are 100% in your rights to do whatever you want. >The issue is the expected value of the subthread No offense, but your "years of experience" or "expected value" is equivalent to your "biased opinion" because, as other people in this thread and I have shown, we had another "biased opinion" on what that probability distribution for the expected value looked like. To me it doesn't look like flame bait and it looks like their's plenty of flame retardant as well. Either way, none of these predictions or opinions really matter in the face of what actually occurred. The expected value of a post is a moving target that eventually coalesces into the actual demonstrated value of the post. The actual value of this post demonstrates that no flamewar occurred. So you were wrong while other people and I were right. Whatever... if you want me to add more "flame retardant" next time I'll add it. It doesn't change the fact that for this thread you showed up onsite with a firehose to put out a fire that never occurred.