Here's the think, asymptomatic, pre-symptomatic, and not infected are all three very different things, yet appear identical. Obviously, anyone who is infected poses some degree of risk of transmitting the virus.
The question is: does that risk rise (and does the mitigation provided by mask-wearing commensurately rise) to the level of compelling non-infected people to wear masks?
I think that this question is answered very differently by people who (wrongly) believe that achieving a risk level of zero is possible, much less, desirable. For those who understand that almost no risk can ever be mitigated away completely, and therefore some level of residual risk must be deemed to be acceptable, the decision to wear a mask is more nuanced.
Nice tap dancing.
All it says is that you apparently are in the "masks are bad" camp.
I am in the "it's up to you" camp. I am not trying to convince anybody else how they should behave.