> if you're not ready to allow me to clear up your misconceptions about the
> meaning of my own remarks, even where you acknowledge you potentially
> misunderstand the English, there isn't much point in continuing the dialogue.

Of course you can try to clear up what you think is my misconception about what you *meant* to write. It's just that I won't take your word that this is what you actually *wrote* (I'm still hoping for some other native English speaker to state his opinion), making me believe that you retracted your former statement that a review can't be on something that "hasn't been sold" when you later said that a review can be done on "hardware not publicly available".

And as I have your attention again I ask those yet unanswered questions once more:

Do you think the author believed it was only "tenuously-connected" or do you think he believed he wrote about the device to be released by Cherrypal as the successor of the original CherryPad?
In your opinion, what would have been a stronger connection for a pre-sale device other than Cherrypal "identifying the device"?
Do you have examples for this "elsewhere" you talked about from which he could have adopted the statements I quoted in a previous posting?
If my conclusion that you must believe that the part of the article I quoted in posting #162 was pulled from thin air by the author is wrong then what do you believe how this part was written without access to a physical device as you say? Would you please tell your opinion on said part of the article?