that i've said it was a subtext - twice - means i haven't suggested it was stated. so re-iterate that again, please.
when i emphasize your lack of knowledge, it's of previous (almost ubiquitous) arguments which coloured both the initial comment and reply -- taken literally, i wouldn't disagree the exchange seems unusual. given history, it actually makes more sense than your pedantry allowed it to.
so you're contextually uneducated. telling someone to educate himself.
now, you're stubborn. but probably see where i'm coming from by now if not by my second address of you. i'm quite sure you were only trying to antagonize, though. maybe i was doing the same? i wasn't.
you're welcome.
|