Chase, as a courtesy to David, perhaps you might combine your last two responses to me in the form of a revised response to David's post of 12:13 pm today.

Taken together, I believe your last two responses to me come pretty close to explaining why you simply referred him to Mitchell v. Clark.

Had you done that in the first place, you would have put no one in the position of having to guess or assume why you responded as you did to David.

As I am sure you are aware, guesswork and assumptions on a forum of this type tend to lead nowhere pretty fast.