> it took you one sentence to summarise the few hundred words he wrote. Oh, come on. What sornaensis's one sentence summarizes is ... the one sentence at the s

> it took you one sentence to summarise the few hundred words he wrote. Oh, come on. What sornaensis's one sentence summarizes is ... the one sentence at the start of my comment. It's true that his is shorter; it also gives less information. (For the avoidance of doubt, that isn't a problem. Since you declared yourself unable to understand what I wrote, it's fair enough to try to simplify it.) The rest of what I wrote was (1) an answer to your subsidiary question "What am I missing?" plus (2) an explanation of what I was talking about, in case it was stuff you weren't familiar with. (Of course if I'd known you'd respond as unpleasantly as you did, I wouldn't have bothered trying to be helpful. But at the time I thought you might well be asking a sincere question rather than just wanting to vent about how out of touch those hoity-toity theoreticians are.)