If you cannot understand what I'm referring to when I say "they", then there's no need for you to question anything else, considering you clearly do not have the ability to comprehend my writing.
You mentioned "they('re)" in the context of my "point"; the former connotes a plural and the latter a singular. This is why I wrote as I did. You have stated (more than once) your apparent opinion that I "clearly do not have the ability to comprehend (your) writing"; whilst you are, of course, entitled to your opinion, I have never shared it, preferring as I have instead to question the validity of points that your purport to make - no more, no less.
However you came up with the notion that "almost everything is an attack to me" is a mystery, since I have never made such a statement.
It shouldn't be; it is not my notion but a fact evidenced by your own repeated assertions to that effect (and not only in respose to my own posts either).
I will, however, accept your compliment in that I am logical and consistent.
Be my guest - even though, in retrospect, I might have been somewhat over-generous with the "logical" bit...
A thief goes to a bank and steals cash. He says "I have not stolen anything. Got that now?"
How would you respond to this thief?
There are numerous possibilities here, including but by no means limited to
"you must be the bank's CEO, then"
"you're the Chancellor of the Exchequer, I see"
"I'm a serving police officer, so give me half and we'll say nothing about it, OK"
Perhaps you might now wish that you'd refrained from asking that question...
By the way, I am not a pronoun.
Never mind - you can't be everything.
Furthermore, I must question the validity of the arguments posed by someone who thinks that a pronoun has the ability to type.
You may pose suchever questions as you choose but, when doing so, do bear in mind that a pronoun has at least as much ability to type as I do and, while congratulating yourself (if indeed you are so doing) on your powers of observation in noticing one example of typographical error in my previous posts, you may at the same time ponder on such lack of them as let you miss three others therein (all of which have since been corrected).
Best,
Alistair