Look, I really don't mean to be insulting, and I also sincerely agree with the substance of most of the points you make (CNW is terrible and the reply you received was ridiculous and offensively inaccurate, not to mention rude), but can I venture a small criticism? When you are trying to make these kinds of people take you seriously, the best way to get their attention and force them to face your facts and arguments is to write to them in a very clear, grammatical and professional way. Running a grammar check, or a spell check, or going back through to edit your comments before you send them is usually a good idea. It makes you sound more educated and more credible, that's all. The same rationale applies when writing to Congress or other politicians to advocate for a position.

Even posts to this forum can sometimes merit extra editing; we expect readers to learn from the things we say, but if we want them to listen to us, we have to sound like we know what we are talking about when we post. There are a number of people here, like Bob Wilson or plusaf, who simply radiate credibility, because they generally write at a high level of vocabulary, language, structure and content that reflects a detailed understanding of hybrid issues and an informed perspective. It is easier to have an impact when you come across that way.

Please don't take this personally; many posts here are full of typos, misspellings, errors, or whatever, and that's completely fine; it's a discussion forum, and I'm far from perfect, myself. So write however you would like; this is just my two cents on effective advocacy.