Okay. I am grinning. You see, I am an anti-anti-E.
It seems that when one piles subtle implication upon subtle implication the true meaning becomes one of reader's choice. Since I made a stupid error of using "ridicules" when I should have used "ridiculous" you assumed I was stupid. Since I am assumed stupid, you justifiably assumed that I must be anti-E.
OK, you're too subtle for me. I take it then you did then understand what was meant. Why do you consider it ridiculous?