You know, that might be a good question if it was asked seriously. A lot of this might be fun to discuss with different people.
So an elementary question, simply put, is not serious. Tell me, other than attacking other people's motives, what have you contributed?
It is asked in earnest. I have yet to find anyone who can practically explain why 'information increase' is necessary and sufficient for evolution but simple genomic change is insufficient. Nor has anyone explained why simple changes in the genome can and does leads only to a decrease in this 'information'.
It has been impossible to get the information-aholics to stick with just one theory of information, or at least to define when, where and why the different ToIs are to be applied.