You see that isn’t true by the simple fact that the mere discussion of ND”K got you all bent out of shape. There clearly was no misinterpretation or misapplication of Chazal’s concept. If there was anyone can happily point out specifically which comment they think misinterpreted Chazal’s application of ND”K, Yet no one has because there is nothing to point out. There was nothing here than a vanilla discussion of this Chazal when you got all angry and agitated for no reason other than your not liking to hear of this Chazal. Of course you’re embarrassed to admit that you don’t agree with the Chazal so you instead go after the messenger with nebulous factually lacking tantrums vacant of any argument.
I again invite you or anyone to actually quote any comment of mine and point out what exactly you disagree of its interpretation of the Chazal and explain how you understand that Gemorah. But we all know in advance that you won’t do this because you can’t do this because nothing I said is anything more than a mere citation of the plain Chazal. It is the Chazal itself, despite your assertions otherwise, that you disagree with. But the invitation still stands.
Then you rant about sinas chinum in the very same comment that you go on to make ad hominem personal attacks. As anyone can notice, none of my comments contained any such element. It is only the antagonists that engaged in such behavior.