Well I suppose I have to explain for those too dull witted to get it.
My point was that a visual indication of a critical situation with the autopilot requiring immediate pilot intervention may not be sufficient, and an audio attention getter is required.
Crab refuted this by saying he found a visual indication just fine.
I pointed out in a somewhat tongue in cheek way that there is a fundamental difference between military and civil flying which makes his opinion not relevant, namely that military flying tends to be of relatively short duration (at least in terms of annual hours) but requiring a high degree of attention. Whereas routine oil and gas civil flying tends to be long, boring and routine requiring little attention for most of the time.
In the latter case its foolish to presume that the pilots will spend an 8 hour flight (or series of flights), day after day, looking at the autopilot status indications, the more so on a type which hardly ever goes wrong. Hence the need for an aural attention getter, such as exists for the "red" master caution on the 225.
Do you get it now? Although I thought my first attempt at making the point was the more entertaining!