Why do you suppose I didn't give any examples until I was specifically asked to be clearer, hm? It's because I wanted to hear John's take.

Does he think it doesn't happen in practice? Why? Does he think it might happen but doesn't matter? Why? Does he think it does happen but you should defer anyway out of caution, or at least be more polite than he was? Why? I actually want to know.

I said nothing about what I had in mind because I didn't want to lead the conversation in any direction. It seemed like he'd thought about adjacent issues and he might have an interesting take.

But I try to be accommodating. SK asked, so against my better initial judgment, I provided some examples, all of which are real: I have witnessed every one. I have seen all manner of responses, too, from apologetic backtracking through patient education to full-on aggression of the sort John initially indicated. But I have never seen someone make statements that apparently endorse both ends of that at the same time! So I thought it might be interesting. Which is why I asked questions.

Now you, on the other hand, just seem to want to argue. I comment to other people, and you keep jumping in. That in itself is fine. But you keep telling me that I'm wrong about what I want, wrong about my word choice, wrong about what I think is in my own head. You ignore my carefully-worded premises, you put words in my mouth, you give me motives, and--very conveniently for you!--they all happen to be ones that if true would allow you to dismiss everything without having to think.

It's pretty boring, honestly.