The reason I knowingly offered strawmen citations was to provide a prototype of the response I was looking for. Responses like "but its use as currency was gene

The reason I knowingly offered strawmen citations was to provide a prototype of the response I was looking for. Responses like "but its use as currency was generally..." didn't really fit the bill. Nor did "I don't see how [so and so]". Ideally, I wanted to understand your reasoning. I still haven't gotten very far. Consider that if I can't decipher why you disagree and I'm not permitted to construct hypotheticals (strawmen) as to why you disagree, that leaves me with either assuming you're automatically wrong or not thinking critically at all. Derailment? I don't think that's fair. Until now, I've been pursuing the same question this entire thread (why you disagree with top post).