In this context, you’re actually going to argue that you intended something other than the legal meaning?
Me:
The person who throws the punch is not always the person legally responsible for the punch being thrown. When his unreasonable actions rise to the level of “instigation” or “incitement”, he becomes responsible for the actions she takes against him.
You:
So the way she tried to incite others to commit felony assault?
I was being charitable when I suggested you were simply ignorant of the meaning.
You seem overly hostile though.
I am reasonably confident I am arguing with an unreasonable, intellectually dishonest person. I do not believe you are arguing logically, rationally, or in good faith. My hostility arises from that belief.
It has more than one meaning, though. If you can’t infer the one I meant, you could just ask for clarification. You seem overly hostile though.
In this context, you’re actually going to argue that you intended something other than the legal meaning?
Me:
You:
I was being charitable when I suggested you were simply ignorant of the meaning.
I am reasonably confident I am arguing with an unreasonable, intellectually dishonest person. I do not believe you are arguing logically, rationally, or in good faith. My hostility arises from that belief.