I find it amusing that forum posts often devolve from a discussion of topics to a discussion of the participants in the discussion and then to the insulting of those participants. In the course of intellectual discussion and debate, if one has to resort to an ad hominem, then the discussion is lost. For starters, an ad hominem is a logical fallacy. For an example of an ad hominem:
Person A believes that tribe T should commit to Action X.
Person A is Condition C.
Therefore tribe T should not commit to Action X.
In the case of s33ujimmy, generally he rebuts comments and assertions with the claim that the speaker is a) stupid, b) on welfare, or c) unable to read. Even if any of these claims were true, the speaker's assertion would not automatically be invalidated. It is a logical fallacy to assume so. While the discussion of ad hominem is somewhat off-topic, I think that it is something that people should try to avoid if they are actually interested in discussion.
Back to the topic of World 16 politics, I am interested in knowing how Ad Inf feels about Plight's declaration on thanx.