Yet this was what you wrote. You imply I am a useless pedant when I think all I am doing is trying to get clarity from those I discuss with, yet if what you type does not match what you intend, how is discussion to proceed smoothly? My initial idea would because those making the claim have not yet clearly set out why they hold to it, making it difficult to assess where any disagreement might stem from. My other idea would be because those making the claim have not yet countered the analysis I provided of why I disagree with the claim... their issue either with the assumptions or with the logic. Thus making it difficult to assess where any disagreement might stem from. I would suggest either of these has to happen before we can even know where the disagreement lies, and one can not start to mend a bridge if one can not find it.