[rkk3]

> whatever the merits or lack thereof of his proposal -- the donor's language was intrinsically manipulative

The architect caused a media-circus because he didn't agree with a tradeoff they made and he called him ignorant. You are here also making personal attacks calling him; a "Crank", "Toxic" "Bully"...

> this just isn't the kind of person you want to sit down and do business with.

Charlie Munger would probably top "a most desired business partner" lists...

[almeria]

He didn't merely call him "ignorant", but "crazy". Both are ad-hominem attacks. What I don't get here is why you're trying to soft-pedal this very obvious fact.

"Crank", "Toxic" "Bully"

Accurate and justified, in light of the aforementioned unprovoked attacks.

He just thinks that because he's a billionaire, he can get away with it.

[rkk3]

> Accurate and justified

I see so when you make ad-hominem attacks they are ok, but if you don't agree with someone & they make ad-hominem attacks they are a "toxic bully"

[almeria]

The situation is in no way symmetric. I think we can let it go at that.