>Hi Walter....
> I do believe that alan did jump into this thread and gave his answer.
>
> But it seems whatever answer alan gives is not good enough for peter.
>
> It reminds me of arguments that my 9yr old makes to stay up late ever night. No matter what answer/reason I give she persists.

Hi Rod,

Edward Pikman has brought it to the attention somewhere else in this thread: the strawman fallacy. And that's what's happening here a lot. Also in this case it's happening.

All too often, when 'opponents' address me, either directly or indirectly, they actually address a strawman they have created themselves. Problem for me is that they have given it my name, Peter.

You too are doing that, as is Craig Berntson. What is the opinion of the strawman, what is the opinion of Peter?

The strawman: He has again and again showed no respect for the ultimate attempts by YAG to explain things and he disrespectfully continues to demand reasons.

Peter: He has politely and diplomatically requested YAG to give a more solid statement of the reasons. YAG has indeed replied. Peter thanked him for replying and also stated that the reply contained, in his opinion, not the reasons. So, he requested one more time. There came no reaction. Peter decided to send a private message, because he feared that YAG might have overseen the reply. After 9 days of nn reaction, Peter decided to publish that private post, as it contained no personal or offending words.

Now, there has been controversy about the politeness that Peter claims. It appeared that Peter's understanding of the meaning of the word 'require' differed from the native speakers. For Peter, 'is required' meant 'is essential'. Native speakers thought that Peter was 'demanding' YAG here. This misunderstanding has been solved and rereading Peter's posts no longer reveals impoliteness.