Sam Spade writes:

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
Yes, that's why your statement was wrong. I'm glad you managed to
learn something in this exchange.

Not so. You just can't read with any objectivity.

McNicoll is known for picking or inventing the most immaterial nits
with of the most unreasonable interpretations of ordinary discussion.
His dedication to the task is kind of sad for onlookers and
aggravating to participants -- kind of like a three-year old asking
"why?" ad infinitum. Offer him a lollipop, not more argument.

- FChE