“No, I described the example provided by you as odious, dec. Do you see the distinction?”
That is a distinction without a difference, which makes a mockery of the very concept of rules.
What sort of person offers an “odious” example? What does it say about a person that the example he would choose would be “odious?”
This sort of “parsing” has allowed me to say things about some people that would have been quite insulting had they not been true, while your statement lacks even the saving grace of veracity.
Everybody knew what I was saying, and who I was saying it about, but it was still within the bounds of this nonsensical rule.
Fine. Play Don Quixote with the RM all you want if you’re so inclined. I suspect it will well, but I also suspect there may be others on different forums encouraging you. If so, it won’t be the first instance of refusing to grasp forum rules in order to engender controversy.