> I agree burning books is bad on principle, but disagree that what the author did was comparable. They didn’t take away from human knowledge, like book burning does. They deleted personal notes no one else was ever probably going to read anyway. The difference is massive.

There's so much we know about the world from personal notes the author never knew or intended to be read. There's no way of knowing if your personal notes will be valuable to inconceivable futures. We all have to endure a little struggle to maintain society's knowledge. I respect and understand that you disagree with me in various nuanced ways. We're not going to agree, not for any reasons other than we just have fundamentally different views on the world, or one of us is disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing, possibly without realising.

I'm sorry, to anyone who's read this far. Instead of my "... I'll give you one more, but I probably wont respond...." I should have just said "let's just agree to disagree" and stopped there. I don't think either of us have added much valuable at all since.

Sincerely, apologies for any offence caused or time wasted in frustration.