I appreciate the work Drew Hendricks does. I notice that there is a lot of misinformation and misunderstanding about his work. I also notice that for some reason people who disagree with his work, or with what they think is his work, often discard any semblance of civil discussion and instead go right for the insults.

Why?

I suggest that we stop assuming we know what Drew is doing, what any of us are doing, unless we hear the information directly from the source.  I trust we can all have discussions, including fierce disagreements, without indulging in contests of who can spit out the worst insult.

I may not agree with everything Drew or anyone else does, and they certainly may disagree with me. But I support a free flow of conversation and discussion. Conversation and discussion that is not halted with personal attacks. Insults tend to do that, they either shut down the conversation entirely, or they take us all down to that level. Why play that game? Why not do the true work of discussion and debate, freely, in search of our commonalities and our differences? Along the way we can even dig below the rumors and assumptions and find out what really is going on.