Well, let's see, since I posted my comprehensive refutation of Bhagchandra, you've posted only two links, neither of which is a "google search link." One of them, here
was addressed in
this post. The other, here in part
Its relevance to my refutation was not made apparent. If anything, as your other critics have amply noted, it outlines just how poorly you yourself obey Jain codes of conduct. As I tried to draw you back to answering the refutation, you threw a tantrum and told me you wouldn't be paying any further attention to me. So you can effectively stuff your insults above, where you suggest I didn't respond to that link because of laziness or ego.
It wasn't until much later that you told us the second link was relevant in explaining why you could not respond to my refutation of Bhagchandra without apparently violating your religious principles. My answer to that now remains the same as it was before: it doesn't matter what excuse you want to give for not addressing your critics. Regardless of reason, you still don't get to reap the benefits you would have gained by addressed them. If, for whatever reason, you decline to continue the debate, then the refutation stands unanswered and you don't get credit for what you claim you would have been able to do, but didn't.
Further, I simply don't believe you on that point. Twice now in this debate you've broached a subject and then, when it went badly for you, you tried to backpedal away from it, citing some circumstance beyond your control. I have a hard time believing that all these externalities are to blame for you being unable to finish what you start.