Re: Title Edited from what it was, to:"Windage"

>>Nope. look back, and the original topic was my asking grz for support for an erroneous statement.<<

---My commenting about your back-editing of posts has nothing to do (that I'm aware of) with Grz's original post.

>>He couldn't answer his weak position, and instead decided to shift the topic to my editing my postings.<<

---I was unaware of that (if it is so); I read sections of the thread over several hours' time. Either way, Grz'z 'weak position' has absolutely nothing to do with your back-editing your posts.

>>Then you came by, hours later, and got involved and complained about me editing postings.<<

---Your back-editing of your past posts and altering them to 'near 180s' is something that impacts both the support & Debate Forums negatively...MANY a time it has cast an extremely bad light on ALL people that are taking iodine. I added my concern/post because the topic presented itself.

>>So, you too appear to have merely joined in for the purpose of complaining about me.<<

---I haven't "joined" anything; my opinions are my own. I find no need to 'complain' about anything...my intent was to correct an action that has the potential to cause harm to other people's health & create confusion, where confusion doesn't 'have to be'. Before this discourse, I would have assumed you would have wanted to know (since you apparently didn't already realize) that your back-editing is confusing to those who are trying to put together "iodine pieces" and casts a disparaging shadow upon your purpose & integrity. I'm sad to find you'd rather defend the action.

>>If you have a problem with me, why not deal with me directly in the first place ?<<

---If you would have preferred I contacted you directly via email rather than agree with others on a public forum, and I have offended you in that regard, I offer my sincere apology. I was basing my actions/words on what I've see you do in the past with others whom you disagree with (addressing their actions & words publicly on this debate forum)...so I assumed you were treating others in the way you wish to be treated.

>>Was it a pack mentality, that when you saw others, you joined in on something that you wouldn't have undertaken on your own?<<

---Absolutely not. My opinion and thoughts are my own; the opportunity presented itself to let you know, and I did so (again, in a way/method I have seen you employ with others).

>>So, I now know that you are motivated to discredit me. Thank you for your colorful expression of this.<<

---I have no intention or motivation to discredit you, Vulcanel -in any way, shape, or form. It is YOU who discredit yourself:
--by back-editing your posts without notation.
--causing others to look bad in the thread, when their original/responding post is left unedited.
--changing your opinion/s without explanation.
--and continuing to alter the topic of back-editing away from yourself by attacking myself & others.

No one can 'discredit' another; when the cards are on the table, they can be clearly discerned by all who care to look. No one can change the cards you show, but you.

>>You're smart enough, you don't need anything else that I might have shared anyway. You and the others of your team would probably only want to use my writings to discredit me,<<

--Thank you. Yes, I am smart enough to learn what I need to learn. Your statements and posts have pointed me in the right direction to verify & research your conclusions FAR more times than virtually any other poster.

--I am NOT on any "team" to discredit you. Again, the only person that can discredit you...is you.

>>Sebastian Reed saw the same reception when he was trying to instruct folks on his excellent method for healing dental cavities (remineralization) without having them filled. That's a piece of cake, that you will never learn, from me at least.<<

--I'm sorry you feel the need to withhold healing information from me because you don't like the way I addressed your actions. Thank you, at least for 'throwing me the bone' of the man's name. I'm also sorry that your comment above also serves to 'draw arrows' to your character and sincerity about assisting others. It would seem that unless others slather you with compliments/praise and ignore issues such as 'back-editing', that statements like this: >>That's a piece of cake, that you will never learn, from me at least<< ...come into play from you.

Your intelligence is vast; your viewpoints frequently 'hit the mark'; it IS difficult to be selfless and continue to share one's intelligence & well-researched viewpoints and theories when one feels they are somehow being 'attacked'.

My only intent was to point out how your actions of back-editing without notation serve to discredit your intelligence & well-thought-through conclusions & theories.

I'm not offended that when you (presumably, of course) felt attacked, that you responded in kind (quite honestly, I may have done the same). I just hope that you'll somehow 'see' that your own actions have served to discredit (what I consider to be) your strongest and most valiant aspects - your intelligence and ability to think critically, factually, and logically.

Unyquity