Hi Frankk,
First, I buy your argument about Vitakka and Vicara and You've helped immensely in my practice. I think that with the comparison with the Agamas the argument that there's (skillful, renunciation) thought in first jhana is even more stronger since MA102 skips (as one should expect) directly to second jhana. 100% agree with you. I even agree that Analayo sometimes simply puts his preferences into his arguments and translations.
Still, I'm seriously worried about your manners. I think that what you do sometimes goes contrary to right speech and remember MN8:
(5) ‘Others will speak falsehood; we shall abstain from false speech here’: effacement should be practised thus.
(6) ‘Others will speak maliciously; we shall abstain from malicious speech here’: effacement should be practised thus.
(7) ‘Others will speak harshly; we shall abstain from harsh speech here’: effacement should be practised thus.
(10) ‘Others will have ill will; we shall be without ill will here’: effacement should be practised thus.
Even if what you think about Analayo, DooDoot and others is true, you should simply abstain to insult and write things like the ones you have said to DooDoot in this topic. It has to be expected that the Dhamma is not understood, that people will not share our opinion and such and we should always consider the possibility that we could be the ones to be wrong, no matter how hard we research a given topic. Your arguments will help some, Analayo maybe will confuse others, conditions are in that way and no amount of insults will change that, but it is to be expected that your speech will turn away many people from your arguments.
I don't think that you're a famous Bhikku like Bodhi or Analayo. If you get banned from this forum for harsh speech, very few people will discover your arguments. I would have never discovered them. If you still think that it is good to speak like that, at least think about that unwelcome possibility.