You keep doing it. There's no "we" here. You speak for yourself, noone else. Even if you were the metaphorical mouthpiece of the majority, any argument you made which relied on majority consensus to upgird its premises is, again, invalid by definition. You persist in perpetuating this error in post after post, perseverating to a degree that borders on malign obstinacy. It's preposterous, to be perfectly frank; perhaps even pompous.