I just explained where, in my view, you had soft defended him. By all means, if you want to contest it - please do so. I don't really see how you can read our interlocution and come away with the perspective that Ekko looked the better of the two. And when you defended this claim, you came up with reasons unrelated to the actual discourse.
As an aside, I think it's pretty telling that you complain about me calling others "worthless players", but take no issue with me being called "autistic". If "worthless" is worse than that to you, then your perspective is warped in my point of view.