Don just likes to argue shit on the internet. Doesn't matter about what. It's a perverse hobby.
I object! On face value that sounds hypocritical, I would guess it is, unless I have misunderstood you. To prove it is not a hypocritical statement I think you would need to be hypocritical and argue to show it is not hypocritical. Are you being intentionally hypocritical?, I am trying to talk about ice climbing, what do you want to talk about? Please answer the question this time, I answer your questions.
You never answered my question that I posted before twice.
Early on you wrote: "Since you're now in totally hypothetical-land, I'd have tapped my communicator and had Scotty beam me up.". Then later you wrote: "No, most couldn't, frankly because you don't have the writing ability to adequately convey that." in response to "You can see from the first lines that the post is meant to be sarcastic,...".
You understood my first post to be hypothetical, you said: "most couldn't" , and defined my post as "hypothetical". Please stop complaining when there is nothing to complain about, when you do that you are posting off topic.
OK, since you are unable to answer these questions can we now try and get back on topic? The topic is, what would you have done on slushy ice? I presume that to answer this someone may need to go out there in person to prove what is the correct answer. Would you be willing to do this? I would be, but presently I think it is too cold.
But in the mean time, not to be rude, we are trying to find out if ice-climbing is what this thread is really about in the first place by answering RangerRob. So now we are talking about what is and what is not sarcasm. To answer this we are now down a rabbit trail presently trying to figure out if a previous post was conditional past tense or Counterfactual conditional. Maybe you agree that it is Counterfactual conditional, which is why you are now trying to confuse the process again of getting back on topic as usual. That would make sense!
So then I need to be straightforward and ask you directly. A straightforward solution to this question would help us get back on topic. Since you agree why don't you just say so, so we can climb up out of this pit, that the "grammar police" has thrown us into?