tinyE: how old are you if I may ask?
Given that my age is completely irrelevant short of an intent to use in an ad hominem attack, you may not.
As to the venom in my last few posts, I am a proponent of utilizing critical thought in all facets of life (especially with regards to things I am passionate about, like gaming), something I have become more enthusiastic about after acquiring my minor in philosophy and started working on my JD (this is data that I have shared elsewhere, so I see no need to conceal it to make my age harder to guess, not that it is remotely relevant). Whenever someone lets loose with merely one bit of reasoning that gives formal logic and critical thought the finger, it's akin to nails on a chalkboard to my brain, and three produce that effect in stereo with the volume turned up to 11. Whenever someone follows that up by brushing aside a discussion of why said line(s) of reasoning are not valid by saying that "all you want to do is argue", my experience generally tells me that trying to do any degree of damage control with how society has ignored a key definition of the term "argument" is fruitless as this behavior generally (though not always) indicates that the person is intensely averse to developing logical reasoning in the first place. I apologize if you are offended by my phrasing in my responses to both of your offending posts, but I will not apologize for the core message that I was attempting to convey, namely that your reasoning is flawed for the reasons given and that your response to criticism of your reasoning indicates a high probability that attempting to do so much as correct the damage that modern society has done to the word "argument" is fruitless.
I admittedly write this partially out of likely misguided sense of optimism that I might be wrong on this count, but mostly I write it for the benefit of anyone else who might actually care.