Actually, that's a really good article. I don't know why you'd worry about getting flamed for it, but then, whenever I post stuff that is controversial, I get nervous about it, too, so, fair enough!
I would like to ask if you think there's a difference between "aggression" and a willingness to strike when necessary and no more? In other words, how much force and aggression do you think that a "martial" artist should be willing to use? Just curious, since I find that while the article is very good, and makes an excellent point, I should at least try and present the counter viewpoint (even though I generally speaking agree with you in the article, entirely) that force should be a last resort, and even then, that in the process of fighting, one should be able and willing to stop the fight as soon as the opponent is beaten. Does that require more of a deliberate decision to be less "aggressive" or more cautious? I think that if the martial artist is truly in control of the situation, as you say they should be, then they'll be able to stop when and if needed, but I thought that the other side's argument could at least get a jump off point here if they wanted to start a healthy debate on the subject (since I suspect the article will have its opponents, here and there, and therefore it could generate a very strong topic for discussion here).
I think the article already answers most of my questions, but I simply wanted to raise the points and spark a good debate on the subject to give you some constructive criticism and feedback (so that way the next article is even better, muahaha!).
Thanks again for the article, it was, as I have said, quite good and enjoyable to read! (Myiagi! Woohoo!

)