I think you are right. I'm just playing the disclaimer game. Since this is a political thread there is always the risk of being condemned for supporting various positions. In this case I gave a literal answer to a rhetorical question directed at multi. Following purely social reasoning that would mean that I:

• Am challenging cousin_it
• Condemning Eliezer
• Agreeing with anything and everything said by multi and probably also with everything said by anyone else who agrees with multi.
• Almost certainly saying something about the credulity of uFAI risks.
• In some way think any of this is particularly important to the universe outside the time/abstract-space bubble that is LessWrong this week.

Of course that comment actually lent credence to Eliezer (hence the humor) and was rather orthogonal to multi's position with respect to arrogance.

It's not that I mind too much sticking my neck out risking a social thrashing here or there. It's just that I have sufficient capability for sticking my neck out for things that I actually do mean and for some reason prefer any potential criticism to be correctly targeted. It says something about many nerds that they value being comprehended more highly than approval.