Oops; perhaps my mistake. I was referring to chiming in with a different viewpoint or disputing Bricker’s post #41, which came pre-moderation:
His post seemed to (congenially) point out the arguing past each other problem, and in doing so he gave his honest, subjective interpretation of FinnAgain’s post–that his intended meaning differed from the plain language of his posts (eek, I’m trying to avoid delving in to the merits of the actual dispute, so here I hope I didn’t just mis-interpret Bricker’s post).
I assume that before your moderation, had someone chimed in and said something like “no, Bricker, Finn clearly intended to say X,” that would have been fine. After your mod note, if someone wrote something similar, e.g. “I don’t Bricker’s summary of the situation (post #41) was accurate, because of Y,” would that gotten a warning for arguing a mod ruling, continuing a hijack, something else, or nominally acceptable?