Are your arguments always so non-solid, or only when you're awake?
Who do you think you are to decide what others may or may not find more or less than nitpicking? Congratulations, you don't find "clumsy" typesetting an issue to remark on, whoop-de-fucking-doo, have a hundred extra points, with star, to your social credit scrore. But in the same way you enjoy your liberty of not finding it an issue, I enjoy my liberty to do.
Plus, of course, I have the very existence of word-breaking rules on my side. Rules that were established not for no better reason than to have some arbitrary book to whack over a perceived offender's head but because having a common referable and agreeable ruleset was seen beneficial enough to have, to learn, and to go by, to facilitate a pleasant reading experience. Those rules, and a billion pages of commercially available reading material that for some strange reason was deemed worthy the expense to be made adherent to those same rules. I don't know, it's almost as if people like, and prefer, having a pleasant reading experience, and like and prefer it so much they would even spend money on having more of it.
Feel free (but by no means feel obligated, hint-hint) to come back when you have actual arguments to add to this.