Really not sure where your anger is coming from? You're the one who claimed that the Spanish came over "in sailing ships the size of small Inca cities", I'm just pointing out the historical inaccuracy of this. Machu Picchu was just an estate, as you note not even able to feed itself except as part of the overall Incan economy, and that estate was already larger than the crew sizes of the larger Spanish vessels.
Not sure what your point is about carracks? Those were the predecessors to and usually smaller still than galleons -- the Santa Maria was classed as a carrack, and that had a crew complement of only 40. The largest carrack built as of 1502 was the Portuguese Frol de la Mar with a complement of 500, but it looks like most carracks were substantially smaller. Bearing in mind the context we were talking about of when European diseases were brought over, that historical timing makes galleons irrelevant anyway, since they don't really become a thing until the late 1500s. I used that ship size as a quick-and-easy estimator, as I had tried to make clear in the wording of my earlier post.
About settlement size, "city" in general parlance, even in modern contexts, refers to the larger size of community. If you intended something smaller, even smaller than the 40-person crew of the carrack Santa Maria, then yes, you should have used a different word. I would never consider a community of a few tens of people to be a "city", more of a "hamlet"; a few hundreds on up I might consider a "village", a "town" would be up to a few thousands, whereas "city" even in antiquity calls to mind populations of several thousands. The ancient city of Uruk, for instance, regarded by some as the first known real city, had a population of some 40K.
About “As for "you're not sure you can agree"? Are you serious?” — that's an example of being politely indirect.