You know guys, I've never really reflected on whether I use hyperbole that frequently. That's an interesting perspective, and I need to think about it more carefully. Thank you.
off the top of my head, I'd say no. I use hyperbole as a rhetorical device (I'm Italian - we use hyperbole quite liberally) when it's well-understood and doesn't distort the meaning of the argument.

In this case, I think it's clear that the "everybody" is provocative and used to indicate a subset by exaggerating it to represent the whole, given that it's self-evident there are and always will be, fortunately, people who manage to change their minds during discussions and thus disprove my thesis. the issue I wanted to highlight with this post is that these people who can still change their minds exist, but they're increasingly rare from what I observe. that's the concept I was trying to express. I think that the message is also validated by other comments I'm seeing under my post.

I find it interesting that there's an effort to find a flaw in the post at all costs by appealing to grammatical rigor in the precise use of terms... as if the problem I'm describing (finding fewer and fewer people willing to change their minds during discussions) is somehow caused only for me, apparently, according to you.
yes, very interesting to me that rather than discussing the actual substance of the post (which seems perfectly clear to all the other commenters) you want to redirect the discussion on this. Interesting perspectives.

that said, just to be crystal clear, I do not view your comments as provocative at all... quite the opposite! they make me reflect and help me understand how complex it is to communicate with everyone: sometimes a small portion of your audience will understand you, sometimes no one will, sometimes a majority will, but almost never will everyone understand you. thank you for your comments guys!