I don't know if it was a rant, but either way, sure, nothing wrong with arguments or making them (in the sense of arguments being assertions). But it's important to recognize that assertions are assertions, and not necessarily treat them as facts.

Perhaps my reply was harsh. Eye of the beholder, and all that.

But still, "it is always said that there are no(t) typos, but everything is comms" is a low effort statement. Who always says that?

That's not Q-content. That's pseudo-Q content. If that's harsh, then it's harsh. Failure to distinguish those is taking a heavy toll on this movement.

I don't know if it was a rant, but either way, sure, nothing wrong with arguments or making them (in the sense of arguments being assertions). But it's important to recognize that assertions are assertions, and not necessarily treat them as facts.

Perhaps my reply was harsh. Eye of the beholder, and all that.

But still, "it is always said that there are no(t) typos, but everything is comms" is a low effort statement. Who always says that?