Cotton reportedly proceeded to weigh in 14 times during that day's section on the Napoleonic Wars, each time rephrasing the second-to-last comment made by a more conscientious student. During brief windows in which other students got a word in edgewise, Cotton made a point to loudly grunt in agreement after each remark or shake his head in disgust.

 

“Just to play devil’s advocate, I think that it’s important that we consider the perspective of those who were left out by the Battle of Waterloo,” Cotton remarked, restating a more cogent point made just two minutes prior as a fresh insight without any knowledge of the source material. He added to his peers: "Did you get that? Maybe you should mark that one down just to be safe."

 

According to sources, he referenced one passage on page 39—a randomly selected paragraph from the middle of the text—a record 17 times over the course of the period.

 

“If everyone could just turn to page 39 once again, you can see clearly that ‘the agricultural impact of Napoleon’s forces was minor in most parts of France,'” Cotton said, assuming the tone and cadence of a seasoned scholar of 19th-century France.

 

After having kept mum for essentially the entire semester, Cotton filled up approximately 42 minutes of class time boldly declaiming about dubiously relevant topics ranging from Napoleon’s height as a social construct to Lord Nelson’s kinky sex life. An analysis of speaking time this semester revealed that Wednesday represented a 1,815% increase in Cotton’s participation after data such as his sneeze during a September 13 meeting was excluded.