Perhaps you missed the irony that you further the meta-commentary? Why is it OK for you to go-meta on my comment, but not for me to respond to an actual exchange in this thread?

I saw the parent completely sidestep the content of the grandparent's argument and focus on trivial form issues, and I found this in bad taste (and an all too common occurrence), and wrote so. Simple as that. And while the quote might imply the parent is an idiot, it was simply meant as a quote that fits the practice -- as asked by Teever.