Editing Openai/6973e373-2b8c-800d-84b7-d7001cfc6bac (section)

=== I’m grouping OP’s arguments by theme so it’s readable, but I’m still listing distinct claims. ===

==== OP-A1. “You’re starting with the conclusion.” (re: “too long is very valid criticism”) ====
* ✅ Unquestioned (no rebuttal yet)

OP-A2. “You’re using a self-evident-truth move grounded in feelings (‘feels’) and then sliding into ‘obvious’.”
* ✅ Unquestioned

OP-A3. “You’re speaking for others / putting words in their mouths.”
* ✅ Unquestioned

OP-A4. “You and Greg aren’t engaging any of my counterpoints; you’re just expanding the original point and ignoring mine.”
* ✅ Unquestioned (SReflection didn’t engage OP’s earlier “pinned guide / onboarding / etc.” points in their comment; and SReflection hasn’t responded to dispute OP’s characterization)

OP-A5. “I’ll address anything new here that I haven’t already addressed with Greg.”
* ✅ Unquestioned (meta/intent statement)

==== OP-B1. “I spent many hours on it: wrote content, format, edited repeatedly, and trimmed it under the 40k limit.” ====
* ⚔️ Contested in the broad sense (because it directly rebuts SReflection’s implied premise “you didn’t put in time”)
* But importantly: there is no standing objection yet, because SReflection hasn’t replied. So it’s not “in question.”

OP-B2. “Your ‘if you didn’t put in the time’ premise is inaccurate here.”
* ⚔️ Contested (it is a direct clash with SReflection’s implied accusation)

OP-B3. “People ''have'' appreciated the thoroughness; comments and private messages show that.”
* ✅ Unquestioned (no one has challenged this evidence-claim yet)

OP-B4. “Dismissing content because AI helped generate copy is a genetic fallacy, and I don’t care what that type of person thinks; that signals this sub isn’t for them.”
* ✅ Unquestioned (nobody has counter-argued this yet)

OP-B5. “Calling it ‘obvious to anyone who used AI’ is narrow-minded/overconfident.”
* ✅ Unquestioned (no rebuttal yet)

==== OP-C1. “‘Should’ is an is–ought fallacy.” (re: “prose is far longer than it should be”) ====
* ✅ Unquestioned (no response yet)

OP-C2. “Your ‘better organizational structure’ claim is subjective; proof-by-assertion won’t fly.”
* ⚔️ Contested (it directly opposes SReflection’s “better structure” claim)
* Not “in question” because SReflection hasn’t answered OP’s rebuttal.

OP-C3. “You’re mischaracterizing the post: there is no flowchart; a graphic would still be text-heavy; lists are there for reasons; it’s organized by section/subsection.”
* ⚔️ Contested (direct clash with the “flowchart/graphic/list spam” critique)

==== OP-D1. “I was criticizing his criticism; he responded with distortion/deflection/projection.” ====
* ⚔️ Contested (it clashes with SReflection’s “you can’t take criticism” framing)

OP-D2. “‘Defensive, much?’ was ''him'' being defensive.”
* ⚔️ Contested (clashes with the idea that OP was the defensive one)

OP-D3. “You didn’t understand what happened; you likely agreed with the initial ‘too long’ conclusion and then took sides.”
* ✅ Unquestioned (no rebuttal yet)

OP-D4. “I don’t take this personally; I can take ''convincing'' criticism. What you/they offered isn’t convincing.”
* ⚔️ Contested (it directly rejects the “can’t take criticism” claim)

OP-D5. “I enjoy spotting flaws in arguments; my beliefs end with ‘I could be wrong’; show the work or refine your belief.”
* ✅ Unquestioned (no rebuttal yet)

==== OP-E1. “As mod, I checked Greg’s comment history; it revealed more red flags; I had ample evidence where it would go.” ====
* ✅ Unquestioned (no one has challenged this claim yet)

OP-E2. “I warned him first; I could have banned immediately; he chose to break rules; we dodged a bullet.”
* ⚔️ Contested (it conflicts with the “you used mod powers to censure” framing)
* Not “in question” because SReflection hasn’t replied.

==== OP-F1. “Calling my replies ‘meandering’ is mischaracterization / shooting the messenger.” ====
* ⚔️ Contested (direct clash with SReflection’s characterization)

OP-F2. “This wasn’t gish gallop; your use of the term is assumptive assertion; point out what’s false/misleading and prove it.”
* ⚔️ Contested (direct clash)

OP-F3. “It’s not my fault you pack many bad arguments into small packages; I’m not obligated to cherry-pick; people can take time to respond; no time-pressure.”
* ✅ Unquestioned (no rebuttal yet)

==== OP-G1. “If you can’t handle your critique being critiqued, it wasn’t in good faith.” ====
* ✅ Unquestioned (no rebuttal yet)

OP-G2. “I’m being assertive to test whether you can handle being wrong and taking accountability; mischaracterize again and I’ll have ‘no choice’.”
* ✅ Unquestioned (no rebuttal yet; also includes an implied moderation consequence)

OP-G3. “Give me one solid counterargument; engage even one point; no gish gallop needed.”
* ✅ Unquestioned

===== - None of OP’s arguments are currently ⚠️ in question, because there is currently no standing (unchallenged) counterargument against them after this reply. =====
* Many are ⚔️ contested because they directly oppose SReflection’s prior claims, but those opposing claims are now themselves challenged (so the objections are no longer “standing”).