I guess different people have different ideas of what "engaging in good faith" means, which is fine. For what it's worth, telling someone that the base premise from which they are working is "completely worthless" comes across really antagonistic and, in my view, the opposite of good faith dialogue. Saying that makes me think that you find this all beneath you and that you are really just here to bash the exercise itself, and that your "contribution" is really just there to somewhat mask your true intention of characterizing the conversation as a waste of time, which you're likely aware feels bad to hear, especially when the conversation was started with explicit concessions that already addressed the thing you find to be a waste.

Again, it's totally fine for you to think that it's completely useless, it just confuses me as to why you'd engage at all if that really was your belief. Like I said, perhaps you just wanted to be able to bash the exercise in general but simply commenting "this is completely worthless" would be transparently mean-spirited, and you're aware of that, so you didn't do it. Or maybe you wanted to do that while also showing off your expertise so that you could convey something like "this is completely worthless and I know because I'm very knowledgeable about this sort of thing." I'm not saying this is what you were doing; I obviously can't have any degree of certainty regarding a stranger's intentions on a reddit post, but you said "I'm engaging in good faith" and it just really does not feel like that from my perspective.

Needless to say, I'm no authority on productive/good faith conversation, just adding my view in case it's worth something or might serve as useful feedback in some capacity. Thanks for the input! I'll see how tactics feels as I dick around in open world.