Its really just the reductiveness of your arguments.
I’m wondering if its it even worth listing the various strawman arguments and rebuttals because its not even clear if you realize they are strawman nonsequiturs. But I’ll continue on good faith.
The most obvious observation being that you wouldnt have received your 7% in a bank, so taking the least risk isnt really the gotcha alternative you present it as. Similarly there are many autonomous crypto services that function without incident, that also offer yield, exchanges and “staking services” like Gemini/FTX/etc were using behind the scenes alongside other things they shouldnt have been using. Many people use stable value assets to earn yield in those autonomous platforms and they are still fine. This has nothing to do with storing it on a hard drive and doing nothing with it. But we can talk about that too, people just use separate addresses: savings, spending, speculation. Savings would be the perpetually offline crypto.
Its really analogous to how you have the rest of your cash and portfolio. The reductive part is that you mentally had a “crypto” position (parked in mismanaged businesses) instead of using crypto. Like people would say they're “using cash”.
People are trying to point that out to you, you saying you were an idiot for considering cryptocurrency when you never actually did.