A valid argument? You snipped 7 words from this post:
[snipity snip again]
...And you're suggesting that "the keys of the kingdom to toomim" is the argument I'm making? Have you ever made an honest argument in your life?
Are these supposed to be connected points?

OK - so you are not making the "toomim kingdom" argument....
You do realize that the intent of a successful hard fork is for all nodes to update to the new consensus rules? And that Gavin's intention, then, is for all nodes to update to Classic? Do you realize, further, that Toomim is the lead maintainer of Classic -- that he controls commit access, and that Core will obviously not control commit access to the dominant implementation in that case?
Never mind that I already explained that in a subsequent post, since your method of debate is to delete everything substantive your opponent says and take the one phrase that's left out of context.
... are you making a "toomim kingdom" argument now?

srly, pick a point and be consistant.
To be honest, the amount of fucks I give for your 'arguments' tends to zero, I was only making a point concerning "ad-homs". You seemed concerned that I would resort to such a thing - Im pointing out that you have been hypocritically personalising most of your classic-ignorance towards Gavin and jtoomim.
U still dont get it?