It should be, since that’s what I’M talking about wrt Moore.
Clearly, you fail in reading comprehension.
I clearly explained what I assumed that our discussion pertained to in the beginning of our discussion. If you believe that my interpretation was incorrect, you should either (a) explain why my interpretation was incorrect or (b) quit this discussion now.
As did I. Perhaps you should have read that. Either show Moore’s evidence or quit this discussion.
Notice that I can do this as long as you can. Notice how you’re the one having the problem, since you’re saying that Moore provided evidence. Notice how that makes you have the burden of proof. Notice how you haven’t lived up to that.
Where?
Every time I mentioned Moore’s “argument”. If I was talking about YOUR INTERPRETATION of it, I would have said so. But I didn’t say so. Why? Because I wasn’t talking about YOUR INTERPRETATION of it.
One day you guys will be great friends. I just know it.
If we were to discuss a topic which I explicitly stated to be X and you implicitly assumed to be Y, would you seriously purposely neglect to mention to me that we are discussing two different topics?
I assumed nothing. I explained exactly what I was talking about.
Run along, now.