>At some sufficiently large number of people, you need to acknowledge that how they think isn't wrong, the language is.

This justifies anything popular, including things that are now universally seen as bad, but once were popular.

In the context of a discussion about programming languages, no, it really doesn't. Not all slopes are slippery.

It seems like it does to me. Why doesn't it?

Because not all statements apply to all situations.

This is really vague and unhelpful. I’m going to interpret this to mean you’re not interested in actually explaining the problem, sorry if I’m mistaken.

There's not really any further way to "actually explain" that, often, when a person says something, context matters and it isn't universally applicable.

I'm not even sure why I'm having to explain this. It's is a pretty obvious thing.

Obviously its not obvious to me. I've had enough of your games, if you're interested in an actual productive conversation, feel free to reply, otherwise I want nothing to do with you.

For what it’s worth, this is the read I’ve gotten from this thread as well. I’m not sure how else to interpret the parent’s remarks—his responses seem evasive rather than clarifying.

Yea I noticed that in your interactions with them too. Also while I’m here I want to compliment you on your articulations of the strengths of go throughout this comments section! They’ve been very well put/compelling and helped me understand better how to express the things I like about go in the face of its detractors, which is a constant struggle for me.

> All three of these things are subjective.

Not really. They aren’t formally defined, but there’s pretty wide consensus even among Go detractors about these qualities.

> At some sufficiently large number of people, you need to acknowledge that how they think isn't wrong, the language is.

Not when there are plenty of people willing to think differently and reap the benefits.

> there’s pretty wide consensus even among Go detractors about these qualities

[citation needed]

> there are plenty of people willing to think differently and reap the benefits

"Reap the benefits" is, again, subjective. It's something you like, not something objectively beneficial or worth the trade-offs in all, most, or even necessarily many projects.

This is precisely the unduly arrogant attitude amongst Gophers that others have already mentioned several times in this thread.

You’re welcome to disbelieve me on the consensus. I’m not trying to persuade you of anything.

> "Reap the benefits" is, again, subjective. It's something you like, not something objectively beneficial or worth the trade-offs in all, most, or even necessarily many projects.

Of course, productivity isn’t for everyone. Sometimes for personal projects I’ll opt for things that exercise my creativity and cleverness over the purely productive or pragmatic.

> This is precisely the unduly arrogant attitude amongst Gophers that others have already mentioned several times in this thread.

Hah! This made me laugh. Yes, I disagree with you therefore I must be arrogant. (:

lol...you even take criticism arrogantly. Impressive. It wasn't a personal attack, it was a statement of fact, but thanks for making my point even more clearly for me - not only in your response to that, but in your assertion that your opinion based on your experience is fact. Appreciated.

Restated: You aren't arrogant because you disagree with me. You're arrogant because the things you say and the way you say them are arrogant.

Look, I’m not interested in a slapfight. Enjoy your evening.