You should, as that's how it was presented.
I think you mean that's how you interpreted it.
Also, I clarified my point in my first response to you, expanding what I meant by my first post.
And since you seem to have trouble understanding that clarification, I can only assume you have a vested interest in clinging to your fantasy that I like fat chicks.
Why a guy would cling to a fantasy that another guy likes fat chicks is beyond me.
Especially since the imaginary fat-chick-liking-guy you seem to enjoy fantasizing about (that's me by the way) has clearly explained the intention in the clarification, one you seem to have negatively hallucinated.
For reasons I can only guess, but generally that involves some kind of projection.
But just in case you are too confused, and you can only think of responding with the same point, let me RE-EXPLAIN my original point.
I think the article is a GOOD ARTICLE. NOT because of the fat chick in the article.
I think the article is GOOD because of the clever and funny ANTI-FAT CHICK comments in the article.
I understand you are likely trolling, and perhaps think you're being clever, baiting me to respond over and over, but you keep repeating the same point over and over.
I suppose you might enjoy a hobby of baiting guys online, perhaps your version of cat fishing?
Or perhaps you do actually believe you have a valid point.
Regardless, you may have the last word, if you wish, by responding once again with the same comment, once more.
Cheers.