Let’s summarize the last hundred or so posts: The pro-techeiles camp brings dozens of sources/rayas/kashyas that show that mesorah is a non factor here.
According to their tailor-made ideas of mesora, yes.
They further demonstrate that they are on defense based on the starting point of the Torah, thus putting the burden of proof on the anti-techeiles camp.
This is nonsensical and irrelevant. You for some reason seem incapable of making what is a fairly straightforward distinction between the initial starting point from which mesora is justified to once it already is there, when the default is that the starting point is that mesora is legitimate until PROVEN otherwise. Claiming that the default is still what “the Torah says” verbatim is intellectually dishonest.
The anti-techeiles camp does not address any of the sources/rayas/kashyas, but continues to insist that there is a problem of mesorah (without being able to prove it which on offense makes it an invalid claim,)
The anti-techeiles camp did not have a voice to express their shitta. I am not going to keep harping on your asinine intellectually dishonest misconceptions about the default assumption as to the validity of a mesoras applicability here as it stands today.
based on one anonymous rosh yeshiva
You are making up on your own that this is based on one anonymous R”Y. It is not a mere one R”Y. I am not listing names. Nor should I, because they likely wouldn’t want it.
who (based on the fact that my assumption was not challenged) very likely never went through the inyan and therefore most likely never saw what the rishonim and acharonim say on the topic.
Yet again you are inventing the rules of mesoras. This is irrelevant.