It wasn't a point about exact language in and of itself. It was a point about the conclusion, and how it doesn't account for highly relevant aspects of the publication record and industry. This was not "a better word would be" or similar. This was "the meaning was wrong, the thinking was wrong, and here's why".

▲

colechristensen 3 days ago | parent [-]

Exactly my point. You are making an essentially meaningless distinction in attempts to "correct" what I said to be more precise in a way that does not matter at all with regards to what I was trying to say.

	▲	dundarious 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		My understanding from this exchange is that for you, large distinctions of meaning and reason are reducible and accurately described as meaningless language nitpicks, but regardless, you dress up the last post as if it's the opposite, so I will not respond further.