I agree with the warning from raventhief, that was correct, and I have apologized for that.
This is why I do not participate on this site more than reading it: I am not good at debating. However, I have been posting here since 2005 (and reading before that) and have never before been accused of being a troll. I do not see how my post was trolling. If I am abjectly stupid, fine, I accept that, and I would like someone to direct me to the rule against abject stupidity.
For example, in 2017, I asked on this board the abjectly stupid question of why heathcare should be free when other necessities are not. I was educated, and now feel that not only should healthcare be provided to everyone, other necessities should also be available to everyone here. This is why abjectly stupid questions should be allowed.
On my current post: If someone sent a mob to my office to kill me, and I had the power to stop them permanently and/or punish them appropriately, I would be moving as fast as I could to do so. I found it strange that congress (both houses) and the vice president were not and asked if I had perceived something wrong. According to Velocity: yes, I had perceived something wrong as the situation was not as dire as I believed. According to many others, parts of congress are doing as much as they can do as fast as they can. Both of these points speak to my initial post, which I fail to see how it is regarded as a troll. Also, both of these points are under contention in that very thread and in the news. It seems like a proper debate to me, but I am rather biased.
I post so rarely that this warning is not likely to affect me, but I do feel it is unfair. If my actions were so outrageous in the initial post, why did raventhief not issue the warning for trolling or abject stupidity when the first warning was issued?