[david-gpu]

> I think your first post would have been stronger if you hadn't held up the poster's decision to return home as evidence that travelling could be negative, because that didn't follow on from their post or point whatsoever.

This is how the thread went from my perspective:

> [Them] I used to do something and then stopped. My life is fantastic now. That said, I recommend everybody to do what I stopped doing; I have never met anybody who regretted doing it.

> [Me] If it is so great, why did you stop? There are pros and cons to both doing and not doing it

> [Others] But doing that thing is so great! Everybody should do it!

> [Me] Here are some of the common long-term downsides of doing that thing...

> [Others] Don't claim this happens to everybody! Doing that thing is so great! Everybody should do it!

[rcxdude]

Because the general recommendation, throughout this thread, is to travel when you're relatively young, not to just keep travelling indefinitely. That seems to be the missing gap here. It's possible for something to be valuable to do for some period without it being a good idea to just keep doing it your whole life. (to use an analogy, someone might recommend going to university, but that doesn't mean that you should just spend your whole life doing undergraduate degrees, and you could reasonably critique either option, but not the first by pointing out that someone recommending it didn't keep getting degrees)