According to PAIR, your patent was allowed after you responded to the first non-final office action. So no you did not use the method set out in the article of wearing down the examiner by continually filing continuations to get a yes.
Filing official actions is not the only way to wear down an examiner's resolve. And does it really invalidate my point that it only took me two iterations instead of N to obtain a patent on a device that violates the laws of physics?
Does it really matter which method of resending the same patent was used to get something invalid granted?