[throw10920]

> I did not misrepresent you. You made two claims and I objected to the second.

I made a single claim with two parts:

1. the value that they provide is tremendous

2. you are not forced to use them

And then my conclusion was: these make them non-rent-seeking by definition.

You intentionally rewrote my argument to change its meaning, you know that you are, and you're continuing to lie about it.

I don't need to argue with you further - I've pointed out that you're fundamentally dishonest to other readers, and that's all I need to do from here on.