@jcelerier flatly contradicted the statement that copyright doesn’t prevent you from reading something.

You’re right that @jceleier didn’t say their example was law, that’s because the example is a straw man in the context of what @lacker wrote.

And, who says improving or clarifying a comment is poor form? What is the edit button for, and why is it available once replies have been posted?

I think you added

> Which “it” are you referring to?...

Because I have a tab open and can see the old one!

Edit - I’m adding another point as an edit to show another way to communicate. Would any of your points been lost had you done something similar?

No that’s not true. I did not edit my posts after reading their reply, and the false accusation was that I changed my comment after it was replied to.

I didn’t challenge whether the question was in good faith, but I’ll just note that the relevant discussion of copyright got dropped in favor of an ad-hominem attack.

My question of which “it” was being referred to is a legitimate question that I believe clarified the intent of my comment, and I added it to make clear I was talking about what @lacker said, not what @jcelerier wrote.

> Edit - I’m adding another point as an edit to show another way to communicate. Would any of your points been lost had you done something similar?

This doesn’t answer my question of why an edit should not be made before I see any replies, nor of why any edit is “poor form” and according to whom. I made my edit immediately. I’m well aware of the practice of calling out edits with a note, I’ve done it many times. I don’t feel the need to call out every typo or clarification with an explicit note, especially when edited very soon after the original comment.

Replies exist before you read them.