Most of what you say here is totally illogical, ignorant, meaningless gobbledygook.

1. It would be like going around all day TALKING to people telling them that talking is bad for you.

-- Have you never heard of a parent saying, don't do as I do, do as I say. Have you never heard a daredevil just before undertaking some risky stunt say, "I advise you not to try this"?

-- If someone who smokes crack, tells other that smoking crack in dangerous, his words are not invalidated because he smokes crack. In fact, because he smokes crack, his words are probably more valid.

1. People "do" things, and it is up to the individual on how much time they wish to devote to anything.

-- Exactly, it's up to individuals to decide how my time that want to do something. I read nowhere in the post where the author is claiming a right to tell you, or anyone else how long, or what you are free to do. I think the author of post is speaking about the dangers of EXCESS. Have you never hear the saying, All things in moderation.

1. Idiots said the same thing about books. Reading books is allegedly bad because it leads to inactivity, etc.

-- I bet you anything, you cannot find one creditable Internet source who claims that READING BOOKS (as you stated) in and of itself, is bad, because it leads to inactivity.

4 This post is nothing but a desperate panic stricken shill attempt to get people to stop reading Q. Period, end of story.

-- This is perhaps you most idiotic claim. I see nothing in post that mentions Q. Before Q came along, do you suppose that people did not have equally harmful internet addictions, or engage in similar internet activity to excess? Do you think that if Q went away, people would just stop accessing sites of similar format.