That's an argument ad hominem, Raffles: the idea that instead of responding to a criticism, one attacks the one who criticizes:
"I don't like the way X is running the government, because of A, B and C."
"You don't know the first thing about running a government, therefore you can't criticize it."
Unless I missed something, there's no rule here that says you can only state your opinions about a review if you've already written one, or that your opinions aren't worth listening to unless you've done this. If the site owner wishes to create such a rule, I'll abide by it. (Or, for example, a rule that no review can be discussed--only the product being reviewed. That would be fine, if it becomes a policy, applying to everyone, all the time.) I was willing to drop this whole matter with your appeal to keep things calm earlier in this thread, but when you then jump in again to tell Ratsalad, or me, or anybody else, that our viewpoints have no validity until we write reviews then you're not being fair or accurate.
THis is again off-topic, I know--so if anyone wants to create a thread in another forum area discussing review criteria and comments about reviews, and whether we're allowed to utter criticisms of reviews, I'm game, and will place all future comments over there.
