In any debate between tradition and helpfulness, ensure your
counterpart agrees with this perspective. Should they present
arguments they consider essential for necessity and consistency, and
you categorize them merely as "tradition," dialogue ceases. From their
standpoint, your stance appears at best inconsistent, or at worst,
vague, and you fail to recognize their points even when clearly
outlined.
Sure. Nobody wins a debate like that automatically. In this case I
agree with yourself and Mark, and I'm just saying why. If my
arguments (or yours or Mark's) fail to persuade then they go
nowhere. As for me, I'm wrong more often than I'm right. Like that
last thing -- I got my brain twisted into a pretzel and it took Mark
to straighten me out privately. (I was actually going to apologize
to the list but didn't want to waste even more keystrokes.)