if you'd read my statement correctly - that is, on the context it was clearly presented in, you would have read the words 'if you can't understand this' before the aforementioned point about having nothing left to say. the reason i continued to 'talk' is because i feel you understood it, but felt not to provide any facts, for whatever reason.
you call yourself superior to regular members of the board, yet can't understand simple context of a simple sentence? might want to rethink your self-description.
i quit our arguement yesterday and will quit this one right now, as it's turning out the same way. try the gimmick on someone else.