> If you have a point to make, then make it. No adult wants to play your childish games.
No, problem, Gatekeeper.
So here you go. This sentence:
> It was quite a bit more than a casual mention.
is an understatement of something that amounts to a serious accusation.
This accusation is subsumed by the word “trick”. The word “trick” refers to an action, an action that only intentional beings do. O’Donnell’s accusation is irreductibly stuck inside a loop of intentions.
The only way out would be to argue that Steig used a trick unintentionally, i.e. it looks like a trick Steig pulled, but he did not willingly pulled it. It would be surprising that this way out is available anymore.
This is not the first time this is done hereunder. Adults can assume what they are doing, can’t they?
Just a variation on Brentano’s thesis, which my character accepts. If we follow through this thesis, CA’s blog policy avowed is mainly a myth.
See also how François Ouelette considers that CA has a slightly deteriorated:
Steve M claims not to discuss motives, but the entire blog is based on the implicit assumption that there is a motive behind the scientists’ claims and behavior.