but how is that my fault for not being able to see their real data?
I think you misunderstood my point: By saying "the data put up in the OP was spoof data, to show us what their file is like. the supplied while loop and search/match case would work for either file format", you seemed to be saying that we can trust that the format shown in the OP is representative of the real data, when I just explained why we should be cautious. So I added yet another argument in addition to the first paragraph here.
WHY was it even brought up in a reply to me?
I explained that above.
the blame has been placed squarely on my shoulders
What? I've just been trying to explain why I objected to you saying you are sure your code won't corrupt the data, and why I disagree with the wording of some of your followup comments.
if there is anything further i can do for you just let me know.
I can only suggest going back and re-reading what I wrote, because I'm not sure my points are getting across. For now, I'm out.