> I thought it was obvious I was exaggerating
> for effect.

Yes, you always exaggerate for effect. That's the problem.

> I didn't know ***** or what exactly
> addictions he may or may not have. He did
> seem to be a knowledgeable advantage player
> based on what I read of his posts, whose
> death is a tragedy. I was not implying he
> had a crack cocaine addiction. But I think
> you understand that, at least when you've
> cooled down a bit.

(Ignoring the supercilious insult) That's exactly what you implied.

> In more general terms, it seems obvious to
> me that serious drug use is pretty much
> incompatable with being alive, let alone
> anything as intellectually demanding as
> advantage play. The key phrase I used is
> that it is not in the interests of the
> addict for his addiction to be tolerated.

What you said is the person cannot be trusted and should be thrown off the team. And you added and adjective or two above. Forget Uston, our current President used drugs. Our previous President used drugs. And, oh the guy that most people voted for President used drugs. If you wish to base your estimation of a man on such superficial attributes as going to a strip club or drinking, that is your business. But to state that all team leaders must follow your your lead just doesn't wash.