Imagine somebody writes a blog post "why I bike to work". They detail that they love it, the fresh air, nature experience biking through a forest, yes sometimes it's raining but that's just part of the experience, and they get fit along the way. You respond with "well I take the car, it's just easier". Well, good for you, but not engaging with what they wrote.
Except the post has nothing to do with “better results” of the generated output, it concerns itself with the effect it has on the user’s learning. That’s the theme which is relevant to the discussion.
And we already know LLMs impact your learning. How could it not? If you don’t use your brain for a task, it gets worse at that task. We’ve know that, with studies, since before LLMs.
The original post is a blog post that somebody put into their blog. Its purpose isn't (necesaarily) to engage into a discussion or even interact with anybody. It's the root of a discussion tree, if you will, a place to make a bold statement or just express a random thought.
In contrast, the post I replied to is a response, which by definition (and purpose of this forum) is meant to contribute to a discussion. It's an inner node of a discussion tree and thereby needs to engage with the presented argument.
So, this is an apples-vs-oranges situation, not a double-standards situation.