So they DO control dictionary definitions as well after all? Why did you deny it when I suggested that was exactly what you were suggesting by your disagreement with a dictionary definition? At least make an attempt at consistency.

I never said I'd agree w. you on everything. I reserve the right to disagree about the small stuff, like dictionaries. As for my dumb questions, I would disrespectfully suggest that if anybody is using a dumbed-down dictionary, it's you. On the evidence of our exchanges alone, my mastery of the language leaves yours eating dust. And as for my logic, go back to the first para.

On the question of the hacking - yup, you got me there. What can I say? Just make sure you're ready for the third attempt. There'll be no stopping me next time.

See, right there. You imply that because I disagree with your reasoning about who owns the dictionary, it somehow proves my 'inconsistencies'.

The original premise was you implying it was owned by the pharmaceutical cartel, which I then disagreed--pointing out the the 'elites', owners of all the abusive industries and systems, who are also owners of the cartel, are behind the 'new' form of dumbed down dictionary as well as the dumbed down educational system. NOT the cartel, although owned by the same people, two entirely different facets, and not at all inconsistent. Then you try to lump them all together, ignoring the very clear distinction, to prove your claim of 'inconsistency'

It's you who's removed the distinction, not me. The inconsistency is on your part, deliberately, intended to appear superior and trying confuse matters to make the readers buy your story to discredit me (yet again). Simple loquat lover/squirrel hater, I think not. And me, using the dumbed down version--what's that? Attempted irony, again?? It is funny at least. :)

I'd ask how many debate classes you got A's in (3), but opps. We know the answer to that already.

Although it really doesn't prove much, what is your IQ? How big and beautiful is your brain, really?