> You're imputing a lot of motives based on nothing in the parent comment. To be fair, OP is responding to an ambiguity. Was GP's point that "I Have a Dream" i

> You're imputing a lot of motives based on nothing in the parent comment. To be fair, OP is responding to an ambiguity. Was GP's point that "I Have a Dream" is great and it's a shame that the wider public doesn't know more of MLK's great speeches? Or was the point that "I Have a Dream" is subpar when compared to the other speeches and thus misrepresents his output? tldr; Was GP saying "I Have a Dream" is the "Beethoven's 5th" of speeches, or "Ravel's Bolero" of speeches? Upshot-- OP is not being generous by jumping on the more divisive interpretation. However, since it is a valid interpretation OP's lack of generosity is based on something and not nothing. Fin.