User blog comment:Stuartfergie/Changing the current policy of deleting and editing comments/@comment-5237598-20130709115334/@comment-11707875-20130709141329

I do understand where you're coming from about the comments - I do. It is just difficult for me to understand how people are expected to not know the difference between the article and comments in terms of factual basis. If someone is expected to know what 'speculation' means - as they needed to in order to comment beforehand, then surely they would be able to see the distinction? Maybe my background in journalism has given me a good sense as to what is reliable information and what is not. I still think a disclaimer or something similar would have been the simplest solution.

It's unfortunate that you're mad at me simply because I have a differing opinion, but I won't hold that against you. I'd like to say, though, that I never defended what was said at all. I clearly stated that it wasn't right. I just said that there was most likely a cause and effect relationship between the rules and reactions. I've been called all sorts of things on my website and I know that it isn't the nicest thing in the world, but I've also acknowledged what I might have done that people would go out of their way to do it. That doesn't mean I bend over backwards or change my website because of what people say - but I do take note and if someone is reasonable about something, I will always listen to what they have to say.

I've seen a few people offer to help out in several discussions about this. Stuart did, I think, and I think someone suggested Maria but i'm not sure if she agreed. I'm sure if people were asked, they would be willing.