My arguments have been completely consistent.
If you can find an accusation of inconsistency in what I have said please point it out to me and I will thank you for it.
I have always said that I would most likely support a third alternative implementation especially if it strikes a middle ground between these two extreme choices we have today.
No you haven't, but I don't have time to perform such unrewarding tasks as looking through your post history to prove it.
What you have indulged in is the same dishonest tactics as your fellow acolytes (straw man to open this exchange, stay classy), and the clear intent is to behave appallingly while feigning ignorance (and attempt to irirtate the hell out of your mark). You've constantly twisted logic, invented incoherent consequences, and just straight up saying things that are 100% contrary to observable, empirical facts. You literally just make it all up sometimes. How you can be happy behaving this way, I cannot tell.