When I first saw the 2016 rules changes, I predicted that this would be the shortest Rules Changes thread on record. Boy, was I wrong.
No, your prediction was solid.
Some seem to misunderstand that this is a "forum", where expressing different impressions and understanding is the objective, with the intent being we all might benefit from different perspectives. There are some "absolutes" but we all operate in different environments and "one size ABSOLUTELY fits all" is by far the exception than the rule.
We can share our differences, assess them and decide for ourselves which, or not, may be an approach we'd like to consider and possibly try. When a suggestion is challenged, hopefully the following dialogue to resolve differences will expose improvements everyone can benefit from. If not, "no harm no foul", as sometimes even great ideas, in one circumstance, simply don't fit in others.
Of course, something you don't agree with and have no interest in discussing can always be simply ignored and passed by. When a challenge is rejected, there is no good reason (or benefit) in acting like a spoiled child throwing an angry tantrum, because the point being made wasn't received as being as viable and worthwhile as assumed.
Only those few, if any, who have already achieved perfection have earned the right to lecture, the rest of us have to muddle along accepting what advice and help we can get from, and give to, each other discussing ways we think can improve our efforts in chasing, the ever elusive perfection we understand we'll never catch.
When even the greatest idea, or suggestion, is not received as universally well as anticipated, it's usually a far better idea to review just how well (or not) it was delivered, rather than assume there was something lacking in EVERYONE who received it less enthusiastically than expected. Sharing ideas and advice is what a forum is all about, and challenges should be anticipated, which hopefully can be backed-up or explained. Resorting to hiding behind childish insults and outbursts, rarely does anything to advance the suggestion, more often just making the author look foolish.
