The reasons people are vigorously responding include that the topic has been addressed many times on this forum, as you are well aware (and appear to have ignored the conclusions drawn), and what you are saying is subjective not authoritative despite being presented as the latter in a relatively condescending style (I do not think this is intended), hence people have rebuked it- generally fairly.
With this, just call a spade a spade. The beauty of language is that you do not need to state that you think sugar cake is best for us to understand that is what you are saying- you quite clearly list perceived disadvantages of all other sugar feeding methods while stating perceived advantages of your proposed method. You then took umbrage at those who contradicted you. That in itself is clear.
As you said, from your original post:
I have come to the conclusion that this kind of sugar cake may have more advantages than other methods of feeding sugar to bees.
In itself this is a statement that you think sugar cake is better, however much you qualify it and pretend that's not what you're saying.
You then posted:
If I just said that I think that sugar cakes were best, without giving reasons why, you might be entitled to ask for my reasons.
Which quite clearly shows that you
do think sugar cakes are best, and that you
are trying to say so with your posts.
Equally, if you do not think sugar cakes are best but it's just something you like using then just come out and say so- but don't expect validation. Typing a whole lot of bumf and then blustering about it makes me lean towards JBMs style; yes he can be acerbic but he is fairly well informed and generally shows respect when it is earned rather than when it's demanded. I imagine if I'd been a contributing member of a forum for a decade and the same topics kept coming up and being selectively rehashed, I'd probably be similar...
