If we strip all context from the original circumstance, I imagine we could.

But that’s not what happened, is it? You elected to editorialize that the user is doing it to be fake-different and to gain attention, despite them never going out of their way to do so, never once that I’ve seen actually say it has anything to do with poisoning AI (not that it matters, either way), and never responding when people disparage them to their “face”; literally, just typing the way they want to type and not responding to the behavior of others, the literal opposite of seeking attention.

Which any autistic person could tell you is highly relatable: they’re just off doing their own thing and it just infuriates the allistic folk who now have to make fun of them and say shit about them because, “Can’t they tell how annoying they’re being? Can’t they read social circumstances? I mean, I’m all for tolerance but they should really understand the way their behavior inconveniences me and makes me uncomfortable and now I’ve got make it their problem.”

It annoys you; fine. Different strokes; but you didn’t just say it annoys you: you assigned motive and character to this person because you’re so annoyed and any neurodivergent person would recognize that behavior from when it happened to them.

That’s clearly what AstralPath was referring to and you, then, lined up the plate to participate further.

That’s what I was pointing out; it’s not a generalized argument: it’s a capturing of an explicitly neurodivergent experience and taking it out of that context is, of course, going to make it fall apart.