ShardPhoenix explained. Whether you your or paper-machine happen to disagree with that explanation is an entirely different question to whether he explained. As such, this question is logically rude.
ShardPhoenix did not explain this (i.e. why those effects are stronger, not that they exist), and that was what the supposedly-logically-rude comment was in reference to.
Providing some set of effects that enter into a complex interplay and then asserting that they dominate is an incomplete argument. Noticing this is nothing like the examples of logical rudeness in your link. It’s not approaching this either.
ShardPhoenix did not come close to establishing that you could expect moderation to be biased enough that it would be worse.
ShardPhoenix explained. Whether you your or paper-machine happen to disagree with that explanation is an entirely different question to whether he explained. As such, this question is logically rude.
ShardPhoenix did not explain this (i.e. why those effects are stronger, not that they exist), and that was what the supposedly-logically-rude comment was in reference to.
Providing some set of effects that enter into a complex interplay and then asserting that they dominate is an incomplete argument. Noticing this is nothing like the examples of logical rudeness in your link. It’s not approaching this either.