They used terminology in a way that carries implications. If by pointing that out I brought them 'shame' then so be it (and notice how they never decided to contradict the 'if you don't care' part, so let's not give benefit of the doubt any more).
If you feel ashamed for me arguing against you, then you shouldn't as long as you were doing it out of ignorance and in good faith. However just because you are not aware of or don't believe certain things does not make them cease to exist.
You haven't given any indication that you have considered any of my points in any meaningful way. I'm just gonna accept the fact that you want to continue your linguistic mission and disengage. Judging by your comment history you have a habit of winning wars of attrition.
Please at least consider the idea that being the censorious force in the world can worsen the quality of discussion.
> You haven't given any indication that you have considered any of my points in any meaningful way.
You are right. I need to work on not being so dismissive.
I think this correspondence would have been more appropriate and fruitful as an 'essay'/'counter-essay' instead of this social media format which tends to drive me to look for a decisive, pithy 'win'.
Sorry for railroading you and thank you for being courteous.
Thanks for taking the time to stand up to this kind of arguing. As a non-native speaker, I definitely dont have the stamina to enter a real discussion with this type of person.
If you feel ashamed for me arguing against you, then you shouldn't as long as you were doing it out of ignorance and in good faith. However just because you are not aware of or don't believe certain things does not make them cease to exist.