Chris, I got an email complaint from you-know-who reacting as we-should-expect-from-long-experience to your comments. I swear the guy pays one of those monitoring services to constantly scan the Zone to alert him to any mention of his name.

On the one hand it was a tough call because you were somewhat on-topic, but then when I followed LJK's links and read the material, I saw that you seem to have missed the mark. Near as I can tell, those aren't KC's words, they're quotes from a report. So it ends up looking to me like pure insult without the fig leaf of relevance. Sorry about having to make a judgment like that.

The larger issue is the difficulty of fitting KC into the basic guidelines for flaming: Flame Zoners on Flame, flame third-parties (outsiders) where it's relevant--criticism of public figures is a vital part of our discussions. But where do we fit a guy who once was a member of the community, walked away, but seems unwilling to let it go?

I would suggest that if you have something to say about (accurate) quotes of something he said in public, an impersonal analysis/rebuttal along the standard lines for serious topics on Space/Science would be appropriate. Personal flames, though, that's a problem, since the guy chooses not to defend himself but to complain to me about it. I suppose you could try flaming him on Flame, but since we know he won't deign to come fight, what's the point?

I know I'm dispensing imperfect distinctly sub-Solomonic justice here, Chris. Sorry about that. If you have any ideas for something that more resembles a win-win, lemme know.