Perhaps you should have focused more on avoiding a false equivalence of fact-checking with journalism, as if a) Snopes were an originator of news and rumors rather than being responsive to them, and b) their popularity relied on a perception of the founders' personal integrity as opposed to a history of providing verifiable links to contrary information and narrowly reasoned argument.

Interpretations always differ, but that statement does seem patronizing to me.

Communicating in a large internet forum is quite different than in small groups or in person. Among other things, it's much harder to communicate intent, so it's best to either (a) state intent explicitly or (b) edit the post so that it isn't so vulnerable to crossed signals.