> Yet there was none. There was. You were painting an overly ridiculous consequence of the argument, and then arguing against that overly-ridiculed consequence

> Yet there was none. There was. You were painting an overly ridiculous consequence of the argument, and then arguing against that overly-ridiculed consequence. > Your very post, though, not only attempts to paint my comment as an "old person thing" (hilariously), it then attacks the speaker ("hostile dick"). As I explicitly pointed out, that wasn't an insult. It was a pointer as to how other people will likely interpret your comment. Which was more or less confirmed by the downvotes on it. I wasn't attacking you. I was trying to make you understand how other people would read your comment. The rest of your post again uses an overly ridiculous version of the argument to argue against (that really has nothing to do with my original statement), so there's really not much point in me responding to that.