Terry, (& Trevor, Gwyn, Ruth)
I do not accept your inflammatory interpretation of the opinions I've been attempting to express. I have not called anybody a "moron", nor have I described Araucaria as "god-like". I certainly would never use terms such as "dumb" or "arrogant" to describe my fellow contributors. John Graham has been a publishing about 6 crosswords per month as Araucaria in the Guardian and as Cinephile in the FT, since 1958. He got an OBE for servioes to the newspaper industry in 2005. He is credited with being the inventor of the "alphabetical jigsaw" style of crossword, which was a prominent feature of the Spectator Christmas crossword this year. In a recent BBC4 documentary about cryptics he was "mentioned in despatches" by several of his peers. His place in a putative compilers's Hall of Fame (a term I've chosen in order not to excite folks even further) is, IMHO, beyond question. I simply do not understand why people who are attempting to solve his puzzles would want to criticise the quality of clues in them or , for that matter, in other puzzles, because they have been puzzling, obscure, convoluted, difficult, esoteric, abstruse or complicated. Those are the clues which are the most satisfying to solve. I also don't like it when "solvers" obtain answers on line and then rubbish the clue. That's all I was trying to say. You, and some other contibutors have taken exception to this, and, I gather, to the style in which I've tried to say it. I'm sorry if my views have upset you, and I admire your democratic fervour, but they remain my views. "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it", as Voltaire aparently didn't actually say. But, don't twist my words and use inappropriate and untrue ad hominem adjectives because you have taken a dislike to what I've posted. I hope I will be able to make contibutions to this site in future without being "flamed" by co-contributors.