Mod uses their privileges to have the last word

Question

I wrote an answer that was received so-so. Apparently, I gave some readers, among them the moderator anongoodnurse, the impression that I wasn't particularly nice to my son and was recommending it as general advice.

anongoodnurse wrote a comment with fairly bold, judgemental language:

"I hope this was written tongue in cheek, but its self-serving attitude fits well with the whole of your answer. You can't "authentically" love a child while totally rejecting discussing things that they love and letting them know that you are not interested at all. And to hug your child just before you crush their spirit is just so creepy to me."

I think the language and overall direction of this comment does not become a moderator.

When I responded, they said "this is not the place for discussion", to which I said "Hey, you started it! :-)": It seems unfair for a moderator to make a remark and then claim the last word by moderator fiat.

After other users read the answer differently than I had intended, I edited the answer, quoting anongoodnurse's own objection, which I addressed, in order to prevent the mis-readings.

anongoodnurse deleted my quoting her, I reverted and left a comment why, they locked the answer.

I have never engaged in an "edit war" and find it childish. But I am frankly pissed at anongoodnurse: You cannot criticize as an ordinary user in this fairly blunt and judgemental way and then have the last word by way of your moderator privileges. That seems not OK to me.

I'd also like to have your opinions whether my quoting was out of line (the venerable Rory Alsop seems to think so). anongoodnurse said in a comment "And yours was a direct attack on me, something I did not do." I feel exactly the other way around: I simply quoted a part of the comment, with attribution, which I indeed did perceive as a personal attack. I quoted the comment because it, however bold, expressed what I perceived as a mis-reading of my answer. I then made clear that that is not what I suggest, in order to prevent similar mis-readings. I did not alter the comment or say anything about it except that that was not what I wanted to say. The use was entirely ad rem. That quote certainly cannot be more of an attack than the original comment, for purely logical reasons.

Answer 1

You are misrepresenting the issue. I did not call you out as a bad parent; I thought the advice you gave was not wise. You asked me why I reacted strongly and I answered. The answer is up, the comments are in the chat room. People can read for themselves (hopefully recognizing the spin you're putting on it).

I did not intervene until you called me "the belligerent mod" in one of your comments, and quoted me inappropriately in an edit to score an unnecessary dig. I've removed nothing of consequence except the dig in your post. Which you rolled back. I left everything else intact.

If you like logic, you might recognize the difference between an opinion about your answer and your ad hominem. Also, meta is supposed to be about issues, not people. Making this about you vs. me is not how meta should be used.

You've violated the "Be Nice" policy. I ran this by the other mods for an assessment lest I be out of line. I was assured most positively that I was not. Had there been disagreement, I would have been made aware.