George, whether they are witty rye little potshots attempting to point out flaws in someone's offered opinions with humor, or great essays of studious writing talent, the critique is essential in a intellectual discussion, IMHO. Yet, as you seem to point out, a potshot can sting, particularly if aimed at one who is not prepared for it.
I guess I might be one of those who recently was chastened for an attempt at a humorous potshot at a relatively new poster to this group, when he courageously put up a routing schematic of a school project. My potshot was not meant to be malicious in the least, yet another poster took offense. I hope I explained myself to the gentleman in a follow-up post.
Perhaps that is why netiqette has always warned those wishing to enter discussion groups that the "newbie" should read the discussion board for a while and try to get a sense of the personalities, before jumping into the fray. Obviously, I know you to be a very wise and thoughtful poster because I have been happily reading you thoughts for years. I wouldn't take offense to anything you say, because I know you to be a gentleman. That along the lines that Huck points out...
I think you have to admit that GCA is one of the real shining stars of the INternet in terms of long running and substantive on-going discussion of an artistically oriented and historical topic that can at times become very subtle and nuanced. We often see gentlemen (so rare the ladies have joined in) who are really similar in passion for the subject, get to steaming loggerheads over subtleties. That is intellectual discourse, IMO. That is how we learn.
The real mark of a serious gentleman or lady who wishes to advance the topic and body of knowledge is the one that can stand in the fire, subject their work or thoughts to scrutiny, and have enough confidence and commitment to suffer a few slings and arrows. Further, the one that can take someone elses potshots or reasoned criticism to heart and change their point of view indicates the true scholar of the subject.
It sort of reminds me of the recent advent in our modern age of grade inflation at the so-called hallowed halls of higher learning, as has been exposed at places like Harvard. Professors are reportedly loath to give anything below a B. Where are the John Houseman figures of this age? Do they all have to be Mr Novaks? (warning, time senstitive reference there...
)
I think we long time posters here all have seen where an individual sometimes goes too far in relentless potshots. The trouble is, some of those gents that are notorious for relentless onsloughts of criticism and potshots, know their beans, and back up what they say. That is all we can hope for, rather than the blithering idiots that occasionally have wandered through here, fired up some boorish posts, and then left, thankfully. Some I believe were even IP banned by Ran, also thankfully. You know who they were...
I say, load em up, and fire away... just try to use an emoticon once in a while to show collegiality and respect to the group who collectively give us an audience and mission to advance the knowledge of the main topic, GCA.
