because the man is BUSY putting out ORIGINAL & RELEVANT Work of Vital Importance to Humanity. He does not have enough Hours in the day to accomplish his work, live his life & be BOTHERED by Time Consuming Intrusions from Meat Puppets, who think they KNOW SOMETHING about the PRINCIPLES Mark Teaches

in behalf of

Also, on behalf of.

Source

For someone's benefit or interest, as in He was collecting the dues in my behalf. [Late 1500s] Some authorities insist that in behalf of be used only to mean "for someone's benefit" and on behalf of only to mean "as someone's agent." In practice, however, the terms are so often used interchangeably that this distinction no longer has a basis.

You cannot even consider being wrong and jump adamantly to disagree when you obviously spoke on what Mark's does with his time and what he thinks of ASE and also what he doesn't have time for. The point isn't that you obviously spoke on someone elses behalf, even if you think it's imperative to observation to call people names and find it obvious that THEY KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THE PRINCIPLES HE TEACHES, as you found it obvious when you said he's busy and you also found it necessary to accused ASE of bothering him, which is why you spoke on behalf of what he would think of ASE, but it's not about that, it's that you're so lost in the sauce and arrogant that you dismissed it/denied the obvious and the freudean slip is the fruitless noise and repetetive replies that if they don't repeat things twice, they repeat it three times but your strawmen are the most obvious:

Goodness you really seem to be seething with anger and resentment

Which is a suggestive statement, clearly because with "really seem" he says what appears, not what it decidedly is, To which you responded:

Just as you say you are no fool, because someone else wrote so- does not make me SEETHING with anger, resentment or PAIN- JUST because you can't handle blunt word.

It's also worth mentioning that there's a difference between blunt words and blunt words said in malice or slanderous language. And I don't think he's unable to "handle" the blunt word, or that's the reason he said what you seem like, and clearly he didn't say that "it makes you" ever, or did he imply that he meerley spoke on such things and did so to say "it makes you seething" as if you needed to repeat back that "Just as you say you are no fool, because someone else wrote so".

Being blunt & saying it like i see it is not "seething with anger or resentment" as you wrote.

Here you are repeating yourself, as if you repeat falsely something it will make it true.

He didn't say that being blunt and speaking as you see it is seething with anything no matter how much you may want it to seem thats what he said or are gonna try to argue that that's what he said.

What you call Verbal Disagreement is actually YOU inserting yourself in a conversation between ASE and the author of the post. You accusing barge of your own act is indicative of a Freudean Slip.

The fact you keep inventing things is indicative of the lies you tell yourself.

You refuse to bow out & continue to try to JUSTIFY your being in the RIGHT by your non-stop claims that I- a woman you never met:

1. first must have something against women in general

1. am full of anger & resentment
2. have PAIN in my words
3. tell myself lies

He never claimed any of those:

1: crazy version

And here's reality:

and I wonder if you also dislike women in general, going by the language you have used.

If and "I wonder", those aren't claims that you MUST have something against women.

2: delusional

I don't need to repeat myself, clearly a suggestive statement to you is a statement of facts. Saying something indicates something is equal to saying that it is so, not that it's an indication, to you it seems like it's the same thing.

3:more delusion

The reality is

Do speak out and be outspoken by all means, but ^if you eliminate any possibility of discussion by screeching your own pain and misery, there ain't many places to go, and it's just unpleasant for the interlocutor.

But the delusion is grand, that's why this won't even come under consideration

As for Mark Passio, my my, aren't you the responsible one, speaking on his behalf and knowing what he wants or doesn't, and who understands him and who doesn't

Nor we will get any explenation as to how it's speaking on yourself when you remark what Mark does, and what he doesn't have time for.