":::Nice to hear you're keeping an open mind. Why should I concede a point if I disagree. I don't debate if I agree, there's no need to. Here's how it works: I make a point. You disagree and make a counter-point.  If I am swayed by your point, I concede that your argument was stronger than mine and we move on. The reason I don't concede is that I disagree with your points.  We might agree on some level; however the point you hoped that I'd concede was central to my counter-argument. It follows that since there is little unique information in the individual articles, they should not be listed separately. If I agree with you that there is significant information in the individual articles, then it weakens my whole argument.  Maybe it's my debate background that's getting the best of me.  I'm engaging you in a debate and rather than disagreeing with me and responding, you're saying that I'm being hostile. If you consider disagreement with you ""hostility,"" I don't know where to go from there. If your intent is to sway me, you're not going to have very much luck. I've laid my case out and it's rock solid. Feel free to counter me now.  That's how it's done.   

"