You yourself noted that it was speculation on my part. So what is this "abandoning truth" rhetoric?
It may have been an inaccurate speculation, but, as you noted, it didn't claim to be truth, it claimed to be what it was, an "example," and a "hypothesis" used to show precisely why CH's claim that Jeff knew he wasn't involved was a silly one. And it did show that, definitively.
My hypothetical didn't show CH was involved (or that you were), only that he might have been, indirectly, through, for example you; and that Jeff's post didn't show he wasn't.
Had you said you weren't involved?
I didn't know that, and my hypothetical did reflect a suspicion on my part.
It's for the best that this happened, JCD -- if you consider my hypothetical scenario a description of dishonorable behavior -- as my suspicion was shared by many.
I'm sorry to have posted a hypothetical incorporating you, when the behavior described was behavior you consider dishonorable.
BTW: I'm curious to know: Do you have any problems with CH's standards of truthfulness? |
