Brad, you have totally missed the point. SG hasn't.He's spot on.

My argument was that Surfcrest should not have made those accusations, precisely because he was unable to substantiate their validity. Why? Because he was not able to divulge the contents of my PM! There was no permission given, "implicit" or otherwise. I was never asked for permission. PM'S are sacrosanct - end of story - and certainly not to be released under any circumstances.

What would happen if a poster made very personal disclosures in a PM? Do you honestly believe the contents should be released based on what is considered implied permission? Are you for real, Brad??

If you can't prove something, don't say it. That was my point.

If you were making accusations in, say, a court of law and when asked for evidence you simply said, "Sorry. I'm not allowed to tell you. " you'd be made a laughing stock.

The same basic principles apply here. They apply in everyday life, although perhaps not in yours.

And you need to stick only to the facts, Brad. Don't speculate. Don't imply. Don't hazard a guess. Don't "expect" anything. Concentrate on the facts at hand. (Although I suspect if you did that, your posts would be of a very limited nature.)

You have no idea how many PM's I've sent. You have no idea of their contents, nor whether they are "whiney" or not. Who knows? We may even have exchanged pleasantries, had a bit of a laugh,.....

And why on earth would you suggest I give permission for my Private Messages to be released? What business are they of yours?

What don't you understand about the word "private"?? Go grab a dictionary and look up the definition.

But I'll tell you what - I'll gladly give permission if you post certain private information that I would like to have about you - let's start with your phone number, address and bank account details.

Fair enough, Brad?