Perhaps it was inevitable that some of my friends who read my previous rant did not see it the way I intended. One who actually attended the party was concerned enough to send me a personal message in defense of Draycott (that shall be the pseudonym I will use for the hitherto mentioned inviter in my previous post).
This post is to set the record straight. That rant I wrote was NOT about Draycott. I thought I had made it clear enough, but apparently not. The rant was really ruminations about the negative effects of a too-large, too systemically important banking and finance industry that has an incentive and rewards structure that is dangerously flawed. I'm not the only one writing on this; there are literally thousands of articles out there talking about this.
Lastly, and this is something I normally do not disclose (tricks of the trade, y'know). The little anecdote about Draycott, and the title "The invitation", was my hook for the post. Or "snapper"device, as William Safire puts it. If you want a more detailed description, read this, point #5 to be specific.
So, again, to my friends who actually know who Draycott is, the post was never about him. Get that?