Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are expecting me to cite the lack of something? How?
That doesn't let you off the hook. You could say about anything "show me one place where x has value". In such a position, you'd always be able to dispute any point raised. If you really believe that there is nothing of value in the Tractatus, then you should give a short summary of what you think it is about and why you don't think it has any value. With such a summary, it's possible to have a debate, since your ass…
Do you think it has value? What value?
Why are you refusing to make a substantive comment? Given your refusal, why should I make a second one?
Yes, debating who should go first is stupid. So why are you doing it? (I am doing it, now, b/c I am curious why you take this approach.)