I do not understand what you wrote there, please explain it in more detail.
For reasons that aren't obvious, your posting from which I extracted your quote above omits my closing sentence in my note as I originally posted it. Which was not in your "there":
But it doesn't fit your agenda, and I concede that it would be off-topic.
Last Tradhican deserves to be commended for accurately crediting my posted words to me with a link to the
topic in which
I originally posted them, and then alerting me via
private message. So I'm writing this response merely coldly instead of heatedly & angrily:
I refuse to accept any kind of obligation to answer any questions about a posting of mine that someone else copied-&-pasted
without my permission into
any other topic (e.g., this SSPX-focused one) than the one in which
I originally posted it. It would impose an unwelcome practical requirement on me to spend
my own time familiarizing myself with the content of an entirely new sequence of postings in which I had
no interest.
I especially refuse when what was pasted herein was drowned in such a mass of
cluelessly excessive formatting that was newly shovelled in by the copying member, like that for which MS-Word has been justifiably criticized [‡]. That being a
topic in which I had already clearly written in that same posting that I considered the answer lately sought by
Last Tradhican to be
off-topic. And I hate seeing
C.I. members derail
topics whose
scope was clearly delineated and quite satisfactory as
originated.
-------
Note ‡: Most obnoxiously,
new formatting--meaning formatting
not perpetrated by me--that sets & unsets text ‘size’ ‘font’, not-quite-black ‘color’, &c., before and after every
[bleepin'] sentence and other visual-layout constructs. MS-Word used to embed that kind of formatting abuse into HTML that was created directly from MS-Word docuмents (i.e., "Save to HTML"); the designers, programmers, and any approving managers of those implementations should have all been lined up and
shot!