I would agree in some senses, but not others. I maintain that it is good to be precise, and that most people can be taught to be precise, given time and encouragement, and it is only a society that demands everything happen ‘efficiently’ that turns time into a scarcity such that people feel they have to find something ill-considered to say immediately rather than think for a time and find the better way to express what they mean. There are those with a mental handicap, and I wouldn’t expect the same from them that I would from someone less limited, but I will always lose esteem for those who choose speed over truth when the circumstances permit the time, or choose precision incorrectness in the service of themselves at my expense.

I make no claim of objective moral value, but rather the practical value. If one speaks, it is for a purpose. Speaking with the intention of being understood is the most common and speaking with precision serves that purpose. Speaking with the intention of obscuring is generally regarded as a form of lying, and lying can be regarded as a form of violation, akin to dosing someone with a hallucinogen, distorting their perception of reality. Such violations can serve a purpose, but they remain violations, and are generally not to the benefit of the listener. The general regard for someone who harms others for their own benefit, once the harm is recognized, is negative.

If we want to stand back from the structures of social norms, personal interactions, epistemic/ontological stakes, etc. none of it matters, but we don’t get to live in that conceptual space, only visit.