Where have you used numbers and shown the quantities present, aside from the ones you make up to convey how you've attempted to read my mind? If you think that anything else "means absolutely nothing", why have you been conveying so much nothing?

I know it's hard to always follow the principle of charity, but you seem to be doing your utmost to violate it at every turn. It's rather tiring, because you end up arguing with straw men that are at best loosely inspired by what I said. I'm not sure anyone really benefits from reading you argue with straw men? Are you benefiting from writing and then vanquishing them? Wow--you really decapitated that one with that 99% quip...look at the straw flying all over the place! Who cares if I intentionally used language that did not convey the idea of "most" or "99%" or anything like that.

Anyway, again, "You were either pushing back against Phoebe or [...] against SR who said "I haven't seen it but there are always exceptions", and that means you were probably making a pretty strong claim, for which having a strong argument is necessary."

If you weren't trying to make a strong argument, you can simply say, "No, I wasn't trying to claim it was vanishingly rare, just illustrating why it wasn't the norm." Then I say, "Okay, I don't think that was clear from context, but that makes sense--still would be good to have some sort of survey to get a more precise idea," and we're done.

If you were trying to make a strong argument, then you could respond to my criticism of the argument.

If you don't want to argue about arguments, you can say, "We can agree to disagree", or not reply at all, or say, "I made my point the way I wanted to", or any number of other things.

The current approach isn't working well, however.