LD Max says he’s left the discussion.
In fairness to him I should explain that when I referred to people who resort to “name-calling, sarcasm and personal insults” I wasn’t referring only to him.
I also mentioned to people who are less independent and objective than they would like readers to believe. The two categories often overlap, but I readily concede LD didn't try to give the impression his comments were even remotely independent or objective.
“Don’t believe everything you’re told.” I’m amused he should think I would. I urged readers to be cautious about assertions made.
However, that also applies to assertions by people who try to give the impression they are giving neutral advice when they are not.
Some recommendations/warnings about schools, both on this website and elsewhere, are based upon direct personal experience and some are based upon hearsay as LD describes it. It doesn’t follow that no weight should be attached to the latter. If the same or very similar comments come from a number of different sources then, at the very least, warning bells should ring loudly.
“Intelligent probing” of assertions is good advice but, again, it also applies to posts by people claiming to be independent.
“….. a number of agendas at play here.”
LD appears to want readers to believe that applies only to one side here - whereas people on the other side don’t have an agenda. That is where he and I differ.
“This boy needs to grow up - and if he is incapable of making the judgement himself, he needs to know that this behaviour is not acceptable.”
This boy. 
Not acceptable to whom?
“In *this* industry, the *professional* thing to do is …… etc.”
LD was rather coy about how long he’s actually been in the industry. For some reason, he referred to obtaining his “ATPL (Frozen) **** years ago”.
Curious. 
I resist the temptation to speculate about whether that's because it’s so many years that he can’t remember, or so few years that he doesn’t want to reveal it while being so patronising to (and about) others.
“In fact, all a797 has achieved is to damage his own credibility.”
Not IMHO.
“a797 ………. is trying to force his own childish views down everyone's throat and flaming those who don't agree with him.” Pots and kettles come to mind.
LD says Tarasky is missing the point.
I think he/she is spot on.
The point LD is missing is that this forum is for wannabees to ask questions and exchange information and experiences.
It is not for schools.
Nor is it for FI’s (or other professionals) who have a personal interest (direct or indirect) in defending/promoting a particular school.
Some parts of LD’s posts read like something straight out of advertising/promotional literature and, in one of his ‘delightfully moving tributes’ to PTC (I adopt a phrase used by Keygrip against a797), even claiming “there will be nothing else out there to touch” a new PTC facility which isn’t yet open.
So much for credibility.
FL
Edited for typos.