Yes. Our disagreement comes from you framing the issue as unquestionable "abuse" to shut down rational discussion. You are assuming that a disinterested third p

Yes. Our disagreement comes from you framing the issue as unquestionable "abuse" to shut down rational discussion. You are assuming that a disinterested third party would conclude the environment was indeed hostile, and you are also asserting that a hostile environment necessarily implies abuse rather than differing perspectives. At this point I know the game. It is to keep me engaged so that my tangential comments can be picked apart to show what a shitlord I am and to make my original point easier to ignore. Enjoy your political dystopia.