It would appear BAS is the biggest culprit
Am I really?
Or is it that there are one or two posters here who have taken such a dislike to me that they think that the right way for them to behave is to launch into off-topic criticisms of me because of something I wrote in an earlier topic which they disagreed with?
Back to the OP, this forum could be immeasureably imporved by the simple action of banning ban-all-sheds from posting.
So when anti-capitalist demonstrators engage in violent and destructive protests on the streets because they don't like the presence of a G8 summit meeting, what do you think should be the actions of the authorities?
Should they ban the G8 people, or should they deal with the disruptive troublemakers?
Have you noticed that in this topic, for example, people are complaining about things I might or might not have written in the past when all I did was to enter it with a civil and reasoned response to points that another poster had raised? Nobody has been able to come up with any rational counter to what I wrote here, in fact they haven't even tried.
The problem is not me, it is those who think that a personal dislike of me gives them the right to engage in unjustifiable, irrelevant and inconsistent behaviour in any topic of their choosing, just so long as it is critical of me.
I really dislike the practice of dragging irrelevant disputes from one topic to another, but just this once I will refer to another one. I recently asked a perfectly reasonable question about dimmer switches, and this prompted holmslaw to complain that it was inefficient (but he couldn't explain why), to suggest that I might be lying about the size of the room involved, and to accuse me of dishonesty because he refuses to believe that I did not write about defrauding an insurance company in a different thread several weeks previously.
Why is his behaviour regarded as acceptable?