I would love to have an effective and open conversation with you. You mentioned I should try to be more concise and that I seem to be trying to pass classes. Sure, my responses aren't one-liners at all, but I'm not trying to pass any class. I'm trying to see what we all believe.

Just so we're on the same page, this conversation started with a comment of yours. It said that "it's about having insane, radical, or uncompromising/unrealistic opinions". I assumed you meant that .ml users are "insane, radical or uncompromising/unrealistic", given the context of this thread. I could've misinterpreted you, but that's how I took it. I decided to respond to your post, because I don't see myself as "insane, radical or uncompromising/unrealistic". In response, the only thing you told me was that my response seemed AI-generated. I replied asking you if you could look past your perception of AI-generated content and tell me if I seemed close-minded. You replied saying I should be more concise.

All of this I interpret as if you are not engaging with me in good faith. I could be wrong; communication mishaps happen all the time. In the past, I have misinterpreted people and people have misinterpreted me. It's also possible you're having a bad day or something like that. It might even be possible that you think I'm acting in bad faith or something like that. What do you think?

TL;DR: I am happy to do TL;DRs, but I would also like assurance that you will engage with me effectively and openly.