To be honest, reading all this nonsense is tiring and sometimes even unpleasant (both sides occasionally come up with some gems). In my opinion, Sergey enjoys arguing for the sake of arguing, because it seems like he enjoys all these squabbles. When responding to specific posts from specific people, they clearly write - "to ***: regarding your words, I have the following to say..." Demagogues, on the other hand, will always concoct a vague phrase so that, no matter what, they can latch onto it in a future argument. As a rule, such ambiguous statements hook particularly passionate opponents and provoke aggression; then everyone forgets where it all started, and a senseless brawl begins. The most likely outcome for the instigator is a communication vacuum for an indefinite period; the question is: is it worth it?