I don't take it this way at all. In fact, I'd like you to explain how her angleshooting qualifier works when, in the post that she's basing her read from, you included my explanation to Guillo that outlined it was not angleshooting. How does that make sense for her to think, then? Having a slightly different reason (after first framing it as support because you were solvy) isn't really an original thought, especially when at least as far as I can tell, it's not a thought that could feasibly be had.