Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh boy, more self-sure self-righteousness. You obviously don't get the perspective, because you literally aren't telling me their perspective, you are telling me a caricature you've made up about their perspective. You've combined that with some moralizing about why your personal view is the only possible morally right one, and how it's not just the right personal view, it's the only possible sane and moral view of g…
I'm sorry that this issue leads you to attack me personnally, twice now. Also nowhere have I said that I wanted to force anything on anyone. I pointed out effects that this choice for sprawled suburbs (so in a city setting, and not rural, which is a different deal) has real consequences. And that maybe it's not frowned upon because those people are seen as NIMBY's or speculators, but simply that those choices are unc…
So you don't see what you did, repeatedly, as simultaneously offensive and personally attacking literally everyone who holds an opposing view. Yet you clearly understood that what i did was.
That's super-interesting.
Because what you wrote, twice now, definitely was perceived, as an attack (the only people i can imagine seeing otherwise are those who fervently support your view).
Neither of these were different.
Even here, instead of saying "hey, i wasn't trying to be offensive, let's step back and try to understand things", you've passively-aggressively "apologized" (IE not a real apology), another form of attacking folks.
FWIW: I don't actually have a strong opinion, i'm just opposed to the attacks you've made here, repeatedly.
When you approach problems this way, no one is even going to bother to read or listen to what you have to say.
(and yes, i understand the irony, the difference, i guess, is that i know i'm doing it, deliberately, in an attempt to get you to see it)