The problem is.
While I do acknowledge you as the expert on behaving like a child....
That does not mean I regard your opinion on whether someone else is behaving childishly as valid.
You were included in that statement. You were not referenced. Yet you felt the need to include your opinion of my statement. Rather than your opinion of the content of my statement.
Mike was supporting Marlowe for being "brave" and for dealing with people here.
Mike was not providing references nor substantiation for Marlowe's claims.
Personality over content.
You had a problem with that. I am not surprised. I have previously established your pattern of lies and strawmen to "substantiate" your position. Most recently, Christian took you to task for your ignorance of basic debate principles.
Yes, you are just like Mike and Marlowe. But I did not see the need to include you in that company (reference my earlier post) as you were not included in the discussion up to that point.
Now you have included yourself. You, Marlowe and Mike all share the same characteristics.
Have I made that clear enough for you?
