It's perfectly reasonable to say "Rust isn't appropriate for my use case". Your comment higher up was more along the lines of "Rust isn't appropriate for anyone" which is far less reasonable.
If you're going to put words in his mouth, you should make them much stronger words. It's not a valid argument either way, but it'll seem more dramatic. (He didn't say either of your quotes...)
I downvoted you initially, but changed to an upvote to hopefully ungrey your comment.
The use of quotation marks on the Internet (especially on Internet discussion forums) has become non-standard, and I can see how it could be confusing. I think on HN that we tend to use italics or email-style
> block-quoting
to indicate direct quotations of posts or user comments.
Quotation marks on forums like HN tend to be used either to mark dialogue (things spoken out loud) or to mark paraphrased or "hypothetical" thoughts. This is different from the use of quotation marks in formal English writing, as described by Wikipedia [1]. Here, the quotation marks are used to separate the "paraphrased thought" from the rest of the sentence.
I'm actually finding it hard to describe exactly how quotation marks are used this way on the Internet; it's something I've just developed a "feel" for.
Sorry, next time I'll say something like "If you're going to misrepresent his intention" so as not to confuse a quoted sentence. And I won't use the word "say", because clearly nobody says anything in a text forum. /s
I find it very obnoxious when people exaggerate what someone else said so as to make it easier to contradict. I gather you don't have any problem with that? Yet you do have a problem with people calling it out as bad behavior? Are you sure you know why you're policing anything?
