Comment by Loquebantur

Yes, it is.

You appear to over-generalize personal experiences beyond their domain of applicability. Then you ignore the crucial points I made, pretending to know it all already, contradicting the absence of rational arguments on your part.

Because you do. You take your own vague "meaning" (that you never specify sufficiently) and lament how it's not being adhered to by others.

The meanings of words are context-dependent. You ignore that here. Dependency in particular has many different meanings. Nobody "denies" you the specific ones you use there.

Your own agenda, that you argue in favor of, is somehow invisible to you? It contradicts the essence of the article, clearly the source of your antagonism here.