The post you quote was a response to this:
Re: Can we get back on the Topic?
Author: Deep1 ()
Date: April 08, 2017 05:21PM
Fair enough, Kristen. But the point is, let's get back on the topic. Trolls or not. It's a valid topic.
This is what you did not include from that post:
If the poster felt the inclusion of the image was necessary one would think that he would have included it in the OP but instead added it in a later post to draw attention to his topic. That is gratuitous and sensationalizes the victim of a heinous crime for selfish personal reasons. Unlike images of sarin poisoning or napalm which demonstrate the cruelty of the weapon in this case we are all quite familiar with the damages done in a vehicular homicide. So yes we are adults and yes we know when someone is manipulating our emotions because they are desperate for attention and yes we have the right to object without being thought of as babies.
So given the history and the present conduct why the surprise that this is not the appropriate messenger for this topic.
“So, what we see here” is that beyond my specific objection to Pete’s gratuitously adding a graphically violent image of the victim of a vehicular homicide to manipulate posters into responding to his continuous soap boxing I was adding the observation that this particular poster is not the best choice to author the topic due to his past efforts at soap boxing.
I'm thinking that this time you were just being dishonest but thanks for yet another opportunity to address this issue again.