My understanding of your agreement with Alicorn was that you were allowed to comment on each other's top level posts, just not address each other directly. It may be that my understanding is incorrect (I don't really care).

Well, it is indeed incorrect. The agreement's not supposed to make sense -- I found out the hard way what Alicorn is demanding.

The important part of what I said was the conditional, "if such failures actually existed." If you're pulling your claims of hypocrisy out of your ass, then there is no appropriate place for them.

Well, that's subjective. If I have a good-faith suspicion of Alicorn not following this advice when in critical cases where it actually matters, surely, it obviously belongs here. Except that to jimrandomh, it obviously does. Which of these two contradictory obvious positions is right? And what inference should I draw from this kafkaesqueness?