> You are making all kinds of accusations about my own personal behavior. That's not what I'm talking about, either! Just because I don't go to church doesn't m

> You are making all kinds of accusations about my own personal behavior. That's not what I'm talking about, either! Just because I don't go to church doesn't mean I'm "antisocial". I have friends, I interact in groups, and I'm literally writing an HN comment right now. My entire point is that none of that is the "third place". OK, seems like you're still pissed about the church comment, don't go to church then, I forgive your sins, athiest. > That is precisely when they move from the "third place" to the "second place": when they become explicit "groups". Even the reddit comment you stole this idea from tells you explicitly what "first", "second", and "third" place means. You are not correct. > One again, this is you refusing to just have a conversation. You are presenting an idea as if it's correct, whether it has any bearing in reality, you are presuming as if somehow, everyone must accept your idea as if it is a fact. This really isn't a conversation, you don't want this to be a conversation either. > You are so intent on criticizing me, so that you can win some vain competition, that you have completely missed what I am talking about in the first place. If you can't find it in your worldview, it must not exist, or it must be a mistake. Pot, kettle, whatever. > Why must there be judgement? Why must there be a winner? Not every idea fits into a narrative of competition. Yeah, sure buddy. > You are making this whole thing incredibly personal. I'm not even talking about myself! I'm taking about interpersonal societal behaviors. I will make things as personal or as impersonal as I want, that has no bearing on how others perceive it. Clearly, if you are so affected by my statements, then the literal "you" aligns almost exactly with the metaphorical "you" as I used. This isn't debate club and I have no intention on treating it as if it were.