I only call it a disruption because I thought it was established as fact some time ago (like 15 June) that, per the court's schedule of events, mediation must be completed 60 calendar days from that date.  Turns out, that was correct.  So the disruption was a friendly argument, in which you and I participated, about something we already knew.  What would you call it?  Granted, we weren't really disrupting anything "exciting" in the way of other topics.  No harm, no foul. We've put this matter to rest.

This is, however, an example of how we generally operate on Agora.  When someone states something as fact, and others disagree, there is a rightful challenge.  It doesn't have to get nasty (a la RB), and the issue is virtually always resolved with proof on way or the other and/or input from the knowledgeable, or a conclusion that there is no proof one way or the other, i.e., "nobody KNOWS nuttin'" (LOL). 

This is one reason you'll note that there are a lot of "IMO", "JMHO" and other disclaimers/qualifiers in posts here.  Not that a proposition won't be challenged, but it's understood that it's not being stated as fact.

All's well....

SGE