Let's rewind here, LOL. This is where we went off the tracks: Yes, my example is different. I'm using that difference to demonstrate that your argument fails.

Let's rewind here, LOL. This is where we went off the tracks: Yes, my example is different. I'm using that difference to demonstrate that your argument fails. From here on out I've been saying: - (i) your example is sufficiently different from mine that to me it proves nothing about mine (though I'm sure it's an example you know how to "win" arguments with) - (ii) here's why I consider your example sufficiently different from mine as to no longer be relevant - (iii) please explain why I'm wrong -- why I ought to consider your example and my example equivalent ...at which point to my eyes the rest of our "conversation" reads as you re-iterating that you prefer your example to mine blah blah blah. And it's worth noting you can't even summarize my scenario accurately, which gives me little faith in your reading ability: * You think that should be able to benefit from work that he does before you have a need but not from work that he does after you find yourself in need.* ...is wrong; the work was finished well before I was in need...regardless of whether I die or not he's doing no further work, full stop.