David, it seems that you regard the exchanges in this thread as debate. To me, this is discussion. Debates are held as competitions to score points. Discussions are not confrontational nor competitive, they have the purpose of clarifying a situation, or information.

Yes, the discussion has veered towards debate, but from my perspective it has always been discussion and my comments have eventually given me the result I wanted. There is no unfriendliness here, I regard Gustav as a good friend, a little sensitive perhaps, but his sensitivity is a valuable part of his nature and gives him an ability to do things that are beyond many of us.

In this discussion I feel that we have finally reached a point where we can move away from lengthy circuitous exchanges and get down to a (hopefully) narrow focus on something of value. In order to facilitate this objective my personal feeling is that this present discussion should end here and a new thread be opened to permit us to focus on this variant element that Gustav has given us.

Well, that well may be Alan, however i'm not going to lock this thread. You and/or Gustav are, of course, welcome to open a new thread on this specific variant element if you wish, but members should feel free to continue posting here if they feel they have something relevant to add to what has already been said. :)

Of course David, I did not suggest that you should lock it, and I see no reason to lock it, but I feel that the area we have stumbled into is too important to get mixed in with the original material that got us to this point.

It is my intent to open a new thread as soon as I am able --- if somebody else doesn't do so before I get the time.

I want to try to dispel some of the seriousness of this debate/discussion with a humorous anecdote of my own. Having varied interest, not only in the keris, I have followed many such debates, just as lengthy and convoluted as this one. A noteworthy example is the incessant "battle" that was carried on years ago in the letters column of one of our major agricultural magazines by a certain Dr Lucas Potgieter on hunting rifles and stopping power, and how to quantify the latter. His "antagonists" were a number of practical hunters equally adept in hunting as he. As the debate petered to a close eventually, with no "winner" having attained victory, one elderly hunter wrote in and said (I quote from memory): "I and my friends have been following this debate with great interest. We had not taken part at all, as we had been sitting high up in a thorn tree out of harm's way while the bulls were battling it out on the ground. It is only now that the dust is settling, that we see fit to come out of the tree."

I think that illustrates my own position during this debate/discussion!

I found myself admiring the limitless patience which the debaters had for one another's views. I have followed debates in other forums where the verbal attacks against parties expressing their opinions have been vicious to say the least. I saw none of that here.

My two cents worth is that the present "lengthy circuitous exchanges" do not serve to educate forum members effectively. At the same time I feel it would be a tragedy if knowledgeable people like Alan & Gustav (and others) decide to hold back their expert comments in order to prevent a circuitous "outbreak" of debate/discussion.

I myself now know a little something about my tiny collection of two kerisses, exactly because forum members were willing to answer and discuss my many and varied questions. For that I am eternally grateful.

Thanks for your comments Johan.

Once again I will make the point that there was no debate going on in our exchanges. It was discussion. Debate involves attempts to convince people of something, I don't think Gustav was pushing any argument, he was just showing pics and making comments, similarly I was not pushing any argument, just commenting. Debate does not look anything like this. I've been involved in debates, real ones, face to face with a clock ticking and a necessity to make convincing argument. Debates can leave you bruised. Nobody gets bruised in discussion.

The reason Gustav and I are so polite to one another is because we were not debating. There is no need to get nasty in a discussion, but it is sometimes necessary in true debate to destroy not only the opposition position, but also the person presenting that position.

But we're nice people here, we don't do that sort of thing.