Nope. I simply have a big enough vocabulary to understand that the word in question has multiple legitimate accepted uses and definitions, and to a person who is aware of them, the writer's intended use is clear in the context in which it was used, i.e., "to suffer a fool," like I'm doing now.
You keep talking about the writer’s intent of use of the word, but, intent is not enough to allow the writer to get away with the incorrect use of the word within the context of the sentence.
So, is it about what ‘the meaning of is, is?’, or is it about making sure you’re understood completely in the beginning, without having to decipher what was meant?
Nope! You’re wrong again!
I’m not an editor, nor a literary writer, but, I know a stupidly written sentence when I read it. Stop making excuses for the dumb writer.