> "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."
I'm sorry if I violated the site rules, but I don't see how? At the time of my post, there was no hint or indication of lostgame being a victim of sexual assault [1].
I'm familiar with the concept of "steelmanning" an argument, but I don't think we should be expected to treat an argument as stronger than a reasonable interpretation warrants, given the information available at the time (sometimes called "supermanning").
[1] And I'm truly sorry for being insensitive, albeit unknowingly and unintentionally so.
"Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive."
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html