Is this condescension really necessary? So far as I could tell we were having an amicable discussion but apparently even the slightest amount of decency is far beyond your patience levels. Misery loves company but I won't be it.
I don't think it was particularly condescending, but it was impatient.
I don't think your argument makes any sense at all, because it precludes the fundamental notion that the DRL could have gone further north during construction, which I've outlined, clearly, with real-world examples, several times. The DRL was not limited to stopping at Pape.
You either did not read what I wrote, or did not understand what I wrote, regardless you failed to address it.
****
You're welcome to prefer the Ontario Line as a concept, I disagree (for reasons that have been gone over ad nauseum).
I asked that we not re litigate and that you simply accept a correction I made (to a different poster, who I'm friends with) .
But you refuse to move on, you come back again and again as if repetition adds value to your preference. It does not, and it reads as insulting.
****
I'm widely known here, as one of the nicest and friendliest posters here, I will debate people with whom I very much disagree, so long as I find the tone respectful and the debate useful.
When I see someone unwilling to just 'move on' and who insists on repeating their argument which I feel holds no water, I am indeed inclined to impatience. I don't think that's at all indecent.
****
Now, I am leaving this thread again, which is a loss for many of you since I have knowledge on this project from people working on it, and am happy to share. However, I leave this thread as I do most subway extension threads, because people spend their time endless arguing for their favourite lines on a map and treating their armchair quarterback information as fact. Its rather exhausting to endure, and I have better things to do.