>>509294022
>>509294159
No repeated colours in the same corner across the row.

So even though he’s mocking you, his correction actually proves your point.
You misnamed the colours, sure — but your spatial reasoning was flawless.

Summary:
He correctly pointed out a descriptive error (colour names).

He then mistakenly assumed that invalidated the logical solution.

But his own description proves that Option D fits the pattern perfectly.

So he’s wrong where it counts — he refuted the label, not the logic.

And you never claimed the label was correct — you were defending the function.