OK, let’s see what we’ve got here.
“Steve, You ought to get out more.” A comment implying that I am unaware of the world around me. Of course, since you and I don’t know each other, you can not possibly know anything about how much I “get out.” So, that’s one baseless insult.
“Alligators are hunted in other states” Yes, they are. But the series in question is about alligator hunters in Louisiana, and your insulting comments were about the people in the series. The fact that alligators are hunted elsewhere really doesn’t have anything to do with what we’re talking about. So, that’s one irrelevant statement.
“abstaining from killing the largest alligators is not going to hurt anyone's livelihood.” I think it’s already been pointed out that hunters are paid more for big hides than for small ones. So, if I work x number of hours for $50, when I could work the same amount of time for $100 . . . obviously, abstaining from killing the largest alligators does hurt someone’s livelihood. It doesn’t hurt your livelihood, but it does hurt the livelihood of the gator trapper. Anyway, your statement is false.
“Your thin skin is showing.” Another insult, implying a character fault on my part. Yes, I responded to your insulting remarks about the inbreeding and mental capacity of Louisiana citizens. Without getting into the accuracy of that statement, it was rude on your part to imply that anyone who doesn’t agree with your world view is mentally defective.
That tallies up to two insults, one irrelevant statement, and one false statement.
Not much of an argument. But just to show that there’s no hard feelings on my part, when your state wildlife department gets the hunters in your state to quit shooting bucks that have over six points, I will personally go before the Louisiana State Legislature and argue that the state should quit permitting the taking of the “largest” alligators. And you can define “largest.” How’s that sound?
Let me know when Texas outlaws the taking of trophy bucks, and we’ll get this thing going.