If you're wondering why I locked the other discussion, I thought that it had run its course after it had become overheated. It appeared to me that the answer had been given to the question you posed but you didn't want to hear what others had to say. If you still have a question outstanding that you'd like to discuss in a civil manner, than why don't you post it.
The thread you're referring to had descended into personal insults and a lot of SHOUTING. Neither of those are acceptable here.
I'll also add that I think this is only the second time I've locked a discussion. Often Peter Spier does so when a discussion degenerates. But because he had been heavily involved in the discussion, I thought it was best that someone outside the discussion did so.
Makes perfect sense. Why argue about logic?
there is nothing wrong with anything, it's all just fine.
so how does it work?
what is the fastest way to communicate that?
There is an industry around communicating things in the slowest way possible.
test me. I'll find a faster way to describe anything you ever "teach". This is a challenge of benefit to every user.