> You misquoted me at #162, and after that you intentionally misquoted me > at #178, #182, #188, and #192.
I'm convinced I did neither.
But 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?