<p>Really. That is a laugh when you say that I “decided” something that posited as a clear hypothetical (and called me irrational for it besides), that I was myopic in looking only at the 1.5% of the formula when in fact I absolutely said this could affect Emory (not Emery) more than that, I certainly never said nor implied that I thought Emory’s action was just a “small difference in data”, I simply said that factually the difference the data makes in the formula used in USNWR is small. Those are extremely different things, and the leap you took from that is inexcusable. I took nothing out of context or was more than what you said, it is there in black and white for all to see.</p>
<p>And speaking of precedence (again, spelling), you still have not explained how Iona could be both unrated and drop 30 points. Are you ever going to?</p>
<p>You may think I need to lighten up, but I just hate when simple, clear statements are totally butchered. Let’s leave it at that, if you want.</p>