>>96275938
>When a wise man points at the moon, an idiot looks at his finger
Nitpicking the criteria of the hypothetical and trying to impose additional variable and details is faggy rules lawyer behavior, at minimum. You aren't trying to prove that the test doesn't reveal anything, but rather, trying (and failing) to engineer a situation where you cannot be labeled a retard for stubbornly, repeatedly failing basic social interaction and communication.
You can keep invoking the sally anne test, but you haven't provided anything remotely resembling a different means of understanding and perceiving the situation from your own point of view. You're just insisting that the real conversation, that did not happen and the archive will prove as much without fault, was that people were trying to discuss the test and make it better because it was somehow deeply flawed in a way you cannot articulate, despite spending hours bloviating about your differing ideas about the construction of a basic hypothetical.