Whatever, Graymatter. You claimed there are "powerful arguments" for Oxford's candidacy and I'd be delighted to know what you think they are. I'm well familiar with the huddled mass of tin foil out there claiming Shakespeare was somebody else, and I know perfectly well that there is no evidence for any of it, which is why I ask. Maybe you have some new discovery.
When I do write to instruct, I get paid for it very well. Furthermore, your tone is obnoxious, and I don't engage in discussions on that level at any price.
What's obnoxious are people trying to steal credit for another man's lifetime of achievements and give it to someone else, without a single piece of evidence to warrant it.
Of all these various crackpot theories about the true authorship of Shakespeare's plays, there one thing I never got; a convincing reason as to why someone would want Shakespeare take credit for their work. It would have been possible to submit plays anonymously if they didn't want to be associated with the theatre or whatever.