I doubt you understood or understand: I said that any kind of wrong using the original name - in that case "Microsoft" - enables the other side (if we talk about sides in that behalf) NOT to hear out any valid criticism. In fact this also enables other participants to join such a discussion and continue to get worked up, even stating something complete wrong. Alike "Hyperbola-community is stating slurs and false accusations". This is surely not correct, but the original valid criticism - you have clearly brought into - is not going anywhere then.

So using that word "slop" is making even more damage when combined with name-definitions: Is there anywhere data being artificial created throughout LLM / machine-learning worth called "valid" and "helpful" - outside of science-usage? Our whole global society is under a clear misguidance that way and it was before. But there should be no doubt that this is going even worse and using artificial wordings and misguiding names does not bring us anywhere, instead draws the whole debate into nowhere. The wording "slop" is therefore not helping when used as replacement for the company-name. As own word? Well, not the point here and as you have said. But I repeat again: Please use clear descriptions without letting out misguiding names, it will do better as the criticism is on-point and even though Microsoft (and others) will not want to hear it, it does not make the criticism invalid, vague or possible to be attacked then. Instead of "microslop" where is the issue that "Microsoft is supporting slop and endangers privacy, security and even democracy itself!"? I see no reasoning in building such slur-naming. And you have not stated "slop" but "microslop", so there is a clear difference within.