I really don't know what all the claims in your first paragraph are all about, though something else you say gives me the idea of an explanation for some of it.
> To start of, let's not ignore how you decided to omit the lie of omission from your point by point response to my post.
Genuine oversight.
> You are quick to dismiss my points as pseudo-philosophical[…]
Ah. This, maybe. But no, I'm afraid you've misunderstood and not in a way that I feel I'm equipped to address now without sacrificing brevity or comfort.
> Regarding your "hah, jk," will you honestly say that even in situations where it would be socially awkward or even unacceptable?
Although you might take some glee in putting those words in my mouth (and with some truly terrible material, at that), no.
---
There's more to be said for the rest of it, but my heart's not in it to counter at this point, especially since much of it would deal with addressing so many frivolities. Unfortunately, my inclination to do so is likely to come at a time when my ability to reply here is dead and the attention has moved elsewhere.
Do note that I'm not very excited at the prospects of giving the appearance of backing down.
> "Thank you for the food, it was very good... hah, jk, that was one of the most bland meals I have ever eaten"
Just awful.