You say “our strategy of citing those who agree with you on this decision as evidence that you are right is faulty reasoning”. What I said, in fact, was that you can’t use the fact that someone you disagree with on many points agrees with a decision as supporting evidence that a decision is *invalid*. You can, however, use that someone whose reasoning and past decisions you find sound agrees with a decision as supporting data towards the decision being *valid*. This is very basic logic. Would it help you if I expressed it in mathematical notation?
Regarding my comment about you being overly-emotional on this point, it was not meant as an insult, but rather an observation - one that I hoped would have the effect of leading you to some personal introspection. My thought was that that it might give you pause in your hurling of personal insults and unfounded insinuations about other people’s character and/or intellect, and generally tone down the discussion. I can see now that it had the opposite effect, and that is unfortunate.
Since you insist on continuing to make me the topic of your posts instead of the issue (and mischaracterizations of me to boot), I am now done with you. And unlike you, I mean it.
If you wish to discuss the decision, please do so. Perhaps I will respond if I see anything worth responding to. But I’ve stated my case, and posted quotes from the decision being discussed as evidence. You haven’t been able to stop talking about me for the past few times you’ve posted. As I care little about what you think of me or the mischaracterizations you’ve made of me, I’ll refrain from commenting on them further.
Good day.