If you wish to complain about lack of tact, flaming particularly tactless posts that are buried in history is unlikely to be very useful.

It would be far more effective to take tactless posts in current conversation, and reply to them with explanations of how they could have been stated in a better way. (Or explanations of why they should not have been posted.) First of all by not flaming yourself, you improve the odds of civil responses. Second and more importantly, very often people who you think are being rude are not trying to be. Instead they are attempting to be concise and informative, and that is misunderstood as rudeness. And third, more people will see your post, so you will have more of an impact.

And finally about the past conversation, what I did is looked at your posting history. That was the longest thread in there. I cannot speak to what happened in your chatterbox history. I can only find out what you posted.

And when I read it over again, I was as convinced as I was the first time that what I had said was not a question of agreeing to disagree. I believe that it is harmful to believe that writing short code is more important than writing clear code. I likewise believe that it is harmful to be ready and willing to just accept, "It works, why I don't know, but it works." That is a path that leads to cargo cult programming.

If you wish to convince me that those things are not actively harmful, go ahead. But as long as I believe that they are, I consider it important to say it. If you were talking instead about the One True Brace style you like to use, I wouldn't care. But you weren't talking about an empty stylistic point. Instead you were talking about fundamental software development issues, and getting the proper priorities horribly backwards.

Please believe that if I didn't believe it important, I wouldn't have made an issue about it then or now. This isn't about being right. This is about believing that you are causing yourself trouble if your prioritization is what you claim it is.