> I suspect that you arrived to the thread with a belief that there's something like a moral imperative not to use Amazon. But you didn't articulate an argument

> I suspect that you arrived to the thread with a belief that there's something like a moral imperative not to use Amazon. But you didn't articulate an argument for that, Was it not you above that said you make a lot of decisions on principal, but find Amazon too efficient to not use? Is that not implying you see moral issues, but decide to use them anyway? If so, is it not fair to then question to what extent by efficient you really mean convenient? I'm not interested in trying to argue a moral imperative here. People that don't see an issue are not going to be convinced by my arguments that I definitely would not be investing a lot of time in. I am interested in questioning peoples given reasoning as to why they keep using it when they see a moral issue with doing so, though. > So maybe that's why I think your approach in this thread was a bit aggressive or rough. I don't think I was aggressive or rough on any individual. My above comment you quote is against an unnamed abstract group, and I wasn't rude or aggressive in my reply to anyone else by my view - I just asked a simple question.