Your comments don’t seem to address any of this. Why is that?
Because that’s not at all what the original comment was about. Why am I expected to offer up a treatise on the consequences of apples on the American frontier in order to debunk someone purporting – unsubstantiated and evidently with no regard for the truth – that Appleseed was running “a land grab scam based on the laws of the time”?
Because that’s not at all what the original comment was about. Why am I expected to offer up a treatise on the consequences of apples on the American frontier in order to debunk someone purporting – unsubstantiated and evidently with no regard for the truth – that Appleseed was running “a land grab scam based on the laws of the time”?
Thank you for the further context. The original tone of the comment I replied to could have been construed as support.