> We're not allowed to play semantics, so this statement is meaningless: you need to play semantics if you want to use the word "is" in this context. That was

> We're not allowed to play semantics, so this statement is meaningless: you need to play semantics if you want to use the word "is" in this context. That was not remotely a semantic game and I find this statement so absurdly intellectually dishonest that I'm done with this conversation.