> I have posted plenty of useful things showing that Andreas is full of shit

No, you posted plenty of false statements, intentional false statements (i.e. lies), misconceptions and ad hominem attacks.

> and just needs to make up stuff to cry about.

Wrong on both accounts. No crying here, and you're the one making stuff up.

> And I'm gonna do it again now.

Making up stuff, that is.

> The by now infamous presentation was done with the default Quake 3 setttings.
> As I have shown above, it's possible to get very close to the infamous 140 FPS
> with the default Quake 3 settings.

Was it 800x600 resolution? Anyway, 84.6 FPS with MorphOS 2.7 is proof enough that your explanation makes no sense, as for getting 140 FPS by an improvement of 200% you need a base value of about 46.7 FPS, not the 84.6 that would lead to your fantasy 253.8 FPS you tried to pass as my claim in your usual way of uttering lies. I have explained this simple math to you already, but you obviously failed to grasp it.

> non-default resolution

You mean Guruman reported a wrong resolution?

> the MorphOS team, wanting to keep all the best stuff for themselves, decided to
> intentionally cripple the driver and take out everything that makes it fast

There are other scenarios I can imagine, for instance that some things which made the 2010 driver that fast were stable enough to show Quake 3 but not mature enough for other applications and thus for a public release, and that resources so far were too scarce to remedy the last glitches that hold back a public release.
That scenario wouldn't make the MorphOS Team look as bad as your suggestion, though.

> in part just to spite Andreas.

Then they failed miserably as I don't feel spited by the MorphOS Team in the least.

> Which of these two scenarios seem more likely to you?

They both seem nonsense to me. Just because you can't imagine a third one doesn't mean there can't be a third one.

> If you're a troll, you'll likely go with scenario 2.

I don't, so does that mean you don't consider me a troll any more?

> If you're likely to score more than 60 on an IQ test, you might go with scenario 1.

Is simple math not part of IQ tests any more these days?