And what, my dear, about a page saying βother rules may have been adoptedβ suggests anything others than that different rules may have been adopted?
You know by know that no-one but you agrees with your interpretations. You canβt find a single explicit agreement with them. Reposting the same pages that you are misinterpreting is very silly, isnβt it.
I havenβt deflected. I told you to go read up on the history of it and you would discover what was being talked about. Since you apparently donβt know how to use Google either, hereβs a link for you
The contents of the book day nothing about the βrulesβ only about the symbols, so lining this book doesnβt answer the question.
In general, responding to a question with βyou havenβt read enoughβ is, indeed, deflection, and is a sign you canβt answer. If you could, you would! Simple.
And what, my dear, about a page saying βother rules may have been adoptedβ suggests anything others than that different rules may have been adopted?
You know by know that no-one but you agrees with your interpretations. You canβt find a single explicit agreement with them. Reposting the same pages that you are misinterpreting is very silly, isnβt it.
says person revealing they havenβt read about the history behind that comment π
All the textbooks agree dude, which you would know if you had read more, but youβve chosen to remain an ignorant gaslighter
With what?
says person who canβt post anything that agrees with their silly interpretation π€£π€£π€£
answer the question, deflecter :)
I havenβt deflected. I told you to go read up on the history of it and you would discover what was being talked about. Since you apparently donβt know how to use Google either, hereβs a link for you
The contents of the book day nothing about the βrulesβ only about the symbols, so lining this book doesnβt answer the question.
In general, responding to a question with βyou havenβt read enoughβ is, indeed, deflection, and is a sign you canβt answer. If you could, you would! Simple.