Oddly the entire discussion is about what the definition of a frame work is. I've yet to see you provide one. For his definition of a framework, which he provided up front, his code fits. It obviously doesn't fit yours, but I have no idea what yours is?
To me I would think that an application framework is a set of classes, utilities and documentation that provides a general outline for an application. However that is an application framework, and he didn't mention application. So maybe his would be considered an OO framework or some other type of framework. If we extend my definition substituting OO for application we get: A general set of classes, utilities and documentation that provides a general outline for creating objects. He has classes and documentation and I would think we can all agree that even in application frameworks the utilities are optional not required to make it a framework at all.
So in your mind, what is required to make something into a framework (just a generalized frame work, or you can talk about application frameworks if that is more comfortable). But when you do so, please stop using words like stupid and idiot, they only detract from your point.