Jesus man, ok. Let’s get pedantic about this. I’m sick, I’ve got time.

Parent comment of this thread is:

Disposable products are gonna have problems to keep them cheap. The solution to straws is non-dispossble straws, always was.

Also this is still a silly topic, straws won’t save the planet.

So, on the table are both forms of straws. In fact, the immediate response to the parent comment leads with

Or stop using straws all together.

A few comments later you say

Straws are useless

To which I call you out and point out that they do, in fact, have a use. Instead of just conceding that they do have a use for a subset of the population, and aren’t totally useless, you pivot to disposable.

In context of this conversation, you absolutely need to qualify if you are talking about all straws or just disposable straws. That’s literally the conversation being had. You just seem to not like that someone pointed out a flaw to your logic. It’s fine to have someone offer different perspectives that cause you to refine your position. Nothing wrong with that. That was my whole point about acknowledging nuance.