Whenever you are speaking (or typing) in public you must consider the message conveyed to the audience as much (or often more) than the message to the person you are addressing. In this case by claiming for yourself the ‘middle ground’ you are positioning komponisto outside of that ground. Since you then go on to present what is essentially the only sane position to have on the subject your giving somewhat of significant slight to komponisto—the casual observer is being led to believe that kompo has been saying something silly.
Being (apparently) oblivious to what you are doing you opted to condescend to komponisto rather than politely retract or ideally just leave kompo’s reaffirmation as the final word. This is a mistake and changes how people will interpret the exchange. I, for example, just downvoted your initial mistake as well as the parent. While I noticed the distortion of komponisto’s position on my first read I let it pass because it was a minor part of an otherwise decent comment. When you latter tried to reinforce you message with a challenge it became the salient detail and one the likes of which I prefer to discourage.
I didn’t consider it condescending; I thought it was amusingly ironic. (Note the juxtaposition: “he gets the second person and you don’t.”) But you’ve made it clear my opinion on my tone doesn’t matter. So it goes. It’s a pity you can’t downvote me twice.
This wasn’t for your frame of reference, but for Louie’s. That’s why he gets the second person and you don’t.
I didn’t consider it condescending; I thought it was amusingly ironic. (Note the juxtaposition: “he gets the second person and you don’t.”) But you’ve made it clear my opinion on my tone doesn’t matter. So it goes. It’s a pity you can’t downvote me twice.