[MildlySerious]

It doesn't seem like you care to communicate anything, really. You've pivoted and conflicted your own words multiple times now, and you were markedly annoyed before I asked questions, which is what prompted them in the first place.

"Books are about information primarily. Then they are about stimulation, of which there is only one type. But not that kind of stimulation." You seem most interested in figuratively listening to yourself talk, because I refuse to believe that your goal is to convince a stranger on the internet that instead of picking up a book they might as well binge whatever is hot on Netflix, which is all I've gathered from your words.

Your comment history seems similarly pessimistic and snarky, and other commenters in sibling threads seem to be getting a similar impression.

I wish you the best. Truly.

[James_K]

> You seem most interested in figuratively listening to yourself talk

Projection.

> Books are about information primarily. Then they are about stimulation

I have repeatedly said that my point is that books provide stimulation but no more than some other media and that it is not the principal benefit of books over said other media (video games primarily). You have been in bad faith for this entire conversation repeatedly failing to grasp this point and then putting words in my mouth which you then use as evidence I contradict myself then gaslighting me when I get annoyed about you doing it. I assumed you were merely not grasping the concept before but this is clearly malicious.

> I refuse to believe that your goal is to convince a stranger on the internet that instead of picking up a book they might as well binge whatever is hot on Netflix, which is all I've gathered from your words.

It's good that you refuse to believe that. Maybe do a bit of reading and thinking to figure out what my actual point is. Here is a useful excerpt from past posts of mine:

> It should be pretty obvious that I think the mental stimulation that is supposedly attributed to books is massively overrated which is evidenced by the fact that more mentally stimulating things do not have those same benefits attributed to them.

> I think the benefit of books is limited to the information you might learn from reading them

Can you figure out from these two quotes which you have access to what my position on books is? Why I think they're better than a Netflix show? Yes you can because you literally did it:

> Books are about information primarily

Then in the next sentence you wonder how I could possibly think that books are better for you than a medium with less information in it. I sorry if you genuinely lack the mental capacity to figure this out on your own, but you can hardly expect me not to be annoyed by it. Especially when you go out of your way to read my comment history to insult me, try a nice little game of "everyone doesn't want to be your friend", and then act all holier than thou about it.

[MildlySerious]

> you have been in bad faith for this entire conversation repeatedly failing to grasp this point

No. I am repeatedly failing to understand why you're trying so hard to make this point. To me. I simply stated my thoughts. I didn't try to prove anything, or ask to be converted or proven wrong on something that I thought was obviously enough subjective.

> this is clearly malicious

Yes, I maliciously tried explaining why I think the way I do after being needlessly challenged in it. I wasn't trying to convince anyone or win some intellectual debate. I still don't understand where the problem is. This comment thread is everything I wish HN wasn't like.

[James_K]

I think I understand your issue now. I stated my opinion (made an argument) and then you stated your opposing opinion (made a counter argument) and this chain continued in a format called a debate. Basically, you want to be able to argue with me, but you think I shouldn't argue with you. Not really fair, is it? If you don't want an argument, then you have to stop making posts which can be replied to. Most people will assume you are trying to argue with them if you keep making arguments at them, and while you may not want these arguments to be interpreted as arguments, they fundamentally are arguments and you can't expect other people not to notice that.

[MildlySerious]

For one of us rubbing people the wrong way in nested threads is not a recurring theme. I'm elated to be receiving advice from a pro. Thanks.

[James_K]

> Snarky response with no substance designed to prompt further interaction.

You are still displaying the problem behaviour despite having it clearly explained to you.

[MildlySerious]

What? Roping someone into a conversation they didn't intend to have? You don't say.