Thanks, that's definitely clearer and I would probably have to agree.
The only thing that's aggressive is making unwarranted accusations about people's intent.
The purpose of quotation marks is to quote someone else's statement (hence the same). But they're often also used by people to avoid ownership/responsibility for statements that they're making without actually attributing the statement to anyone else (similar to weasel words like
some say). I don't have a huge issue with that but if they're not quoting someone else I simply attribute the statement to the person saying it and ask them to clarify if there's anything unclear to me.
Much like his original statement, my question was also no big deal. I agree that he was probably using the term based on common language (or social conventions as you put it) but there's no reason the meaning of such language should simply be assumed or accepted without question if one doubts its accuracy or clarity. Common usages and conventions sometimes have issues with accuracy, and
common doesn't mean universal. Someone may be reading it the same as you but want to take due diligence to ensure their reading is correct before challenging or criticizing it, and other times something that's obvious to you might not be obvious to others - whether because of differences in intelligence, culture, communication styles, or vernacular.
I recommend that if you encounter someone asking a question that you feel should be obvious, either give the benefit of the doubt and provide a helpful answer, or simply ignore it. Accusing them of malice isn't a useful response.
ps. I am definitely obtuse, but it isn't deliberate. It's just my personality.
