Savageduck
On 2014-03-28 17:58:42 +0000, Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com>said:

Tony Cooper
On Fri, 28 Mar 2014 09:36:31 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>wrote:

Savageduck
On 2014-03-28 16:08:51 +0000, Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> said:

Tony Cooper
On 28 Mar 2014 06:23:43 GMT, Sandman <mr@sandman.net>wrote:

For example, a while back you said you provided an "onslaught" of substantiation about something or other. I accept "onslaught" as a word, and it's in the dictionary, but not with the meaning you seemed to have in mind.

Sandman
Yes, I know you're ignorant about the word "onslaught".

onslaught noun - a fierce or destructive attack: a series of onslaughts on the citadel. - a large quantity of people or things that is difficult to cope with

Note, particularly, example number 2.

Tony Cooper
If you found that definition, and still feel that "onslaught" is the right word choice to describe a few cites of supposed "substantiation", then your case is more hopeless than I first thought.

Savageduck
Perhaps a virtual inundation of substantiations was meant to imply a metaphoric onslaught. ...maybe a flood, or even a plethora of substantiations might end up described so?

Tony Cooper
It was hardly an inundation. I don't recall the specifics, but it was a link or two or three. Weak substantiation, at that. He has a different idea of what "substantiation" means than I do.

Savageduck
Perhaps I should have stated that my tongue was wedged firmly in my cheek when I typed my remark.