Well, with all due respect, what you've just said seems compatible with what I've said, so I'm not sure why you begin with "No,." I said that the majority of the your commentary was an argument concerning why Thor should have lost this one, which it was. The fact that it was in the middle seems immaterial, because the middle you're referring to--an argument about why you think Thor would lose--takes up easily more than 50% (if not more than 75%) of your total textual contribution to the article. Which... I believe qualifies as "most." :) [Not including whatever other appreciated labor you may have contributed.]
And, I didn't say it was anything but what "you think." What else would you be arguing but your own opinion? I just thought it was a bit weird, because usually the winner of the poll gets a bit more due. Which seems appropriate given this is probably what motivated a least some percentage of people who participated in the first place. As such, it seems like it was in bad form--but I acknowledge there may have been reasons that you chose to approach things as you did. Regardless, if you didn't specifically catch the beginning where you announce the poll results, based on the focus of your article here you might think Faora won the bout. I've read the other articles, and you don't generally deliver such a long rebuttal against the poll results. I also notice that in most of the fights, you do a cool little collage cut out where the winner is presented standing victorious over the loser, but in this case you didn't do that. Which is a bummer for a Thor fan I think, especially one who was a big fan of that little touch.
Also, to be fair, it wasn't a rhetorical question; I was legitimately curious why you would match these two up if you thought the fight wasn't close. If you thought it was a close fight in the first place, I apologize for not catching that, but it wasn't particularly clear in your article. In fact it seemed quite the contrary, the few potential victories you do ascribe to Thor, you attribute more to Faora's bad attitude and not Thor's power or ability. And, while subtle, but by no means escaping notice, what you picked to be the best Thor pro-argument, while interesting, was mostly florid, and even it ascribed the victory in major part to Faora's over confidence, and features Thor requiring aid. On the otherhand, the pro-Faora argument, while for the most part I think was padded and uneven, was presented in a much more analytic fashion.
Consequently, I think my question was a fair one. So... I'll ask it again: if you didn't think it was a close fight, why would you match these two up in the first place. Okay, just joking, I know you probably still maintain in was a close fight, even if this was perhaps disguised by the content of your article. Also you have more than a few informal-logical problems in your argument--you know, the one that was in the middle :)--which are mostly different versions of what's usually called special pleading. But alas, it's too late too correct them, you've already spoken. :)