Thanks Kim for the contribution it really has allowed me to see more clearly why it was so important for me at the time, and a chance to explain it now.

As I mentioned when you rephrased your question willingly to "propose" as opposed to imposed, you can speak with my brother.

KIM "OK, so what’s the longest you have been able to propose 3A logic during human interactivity in the past? How’s that?"

and my reply then as it is now is the same ask my brother Steve who is now a member.

DES "I will ask my brother Steve to get back to you on this as we have been working on this for some 20 years now. I use him as the sounding board and test subject."

So I did answer it.
I think your question was rhetorical and because of the importance of semantics here,
once a framework is agreement to, "we" impose it not just me.
So I don’t agree with you that there is a "trivial difference between proposing and imposing" or that it can be "overlooked".

When "we" impose something on each other, I think there is a huge difference than one person imposing an idea or concept on another.

For example Franis’s concept that objecting to answer a question "doesn’t work because it doesn’t enhance communication" was never agreed to by me and so by saying I "should know better!" is imposing it on me, I think.

So to me, this difference between proposing and imposing is the difference between chalk and cheese. But due to all of our participation it is made much more apparent to me anyway, so thanks again.