If you are holding someone else's property, and they ask you to return that property, it is ridiculous to then hold you responsible for what they do with their own property thay you returned.

That's not what happened though. The gun belonged to his friend, who had left it in Miller's car, and who asked that he return it.

It's also unclear if Miller actually saw the text asking him to return it, or even aqare the gun had been left in his car, as he was already en route to pick up his friend when the text was sent.

Simple prose is not the same thing as bad prose.

>find the soft/hard magic concept to be an explanation in search of a concept rather than a useful division.

Except it clearly is still a useful division, given that you actually have the same division. You just call it something different. What Sanderson calls hard magic you call not magic at all, while what Sanderson calls soft magic you just call magic. But the division is still there.

I never claimed I was or was not the subject of your comment, nor was I clarifying what the subject of your comment was.

And my comment was pointing out that it's actually an easy chart to understand.

The labels of the axes tell you the same thing as the description, just more succinctly.

I mean it's pretty clear that's how this chart works without that explanation...