Wait. In your thinking it's okay to come to somebody else's place and knowingly break the rules and it's wrong when somebody else points that out? Is that what you are saying?
How can that be correct? I don't get it.
I think you do get it. When people are in an open forum, attempting to defend their side of a subject, and someone else jumps in to cite a rule against defense, I would say that person is trying to change the subject, NOT defend the rule makers. Especially when that person seems to be a serial rule cop, with no other reason to live except to point out the breaking/potential breaking of the rule. Did you ever watch Leave it to Beaver? Do you remember Judy? Enough said.
I'm saying that in the heat of discussion, things get lively sometimes. Good grief. Let it be. If not, that's why caucus threads were invented. So people could sip tea and ponder the universe.