David Kane wrote:

You are ignorant about scholastic chess and apparently unwilling
to address your ignorance. In combination with your willingness
to offer "solutions", you are indeed very dangerous.

I had no idea I was offering an actual solution - as I noted, I simply
provided a contrary view or "solution", thinking that, as with most
things, the answer lies somewhere between the two extremes.

But now that I understand that even discussion of scholastic chess by
folks like me is very dangerous. Strange animal, this scholastic chess.