A recurring note, in a number of flames, is the use of a rhetorical technique much beloved on Usenet - something that might be called "hair splitting over an idiom". In this, after someone makes use of an idiomatic construction popular in English usage, the respondant reacts to the comment as if he was naively taking the words at literal face value, as someone just learning English as a second language might. For example, someone saying that he has a million things to do today, and someone correcting him, and saying that he took a look at that "to do" list, and there were no more than 200 items on it. Now anyone other than a hopeless d*rk would know better than to jump in with that - but then where do such individuals feel more at home, than online, where they and their friends can make their own realities, in which they get to be cool? Here, the tactic will be applied with more subtlety, but no more rationality. The purpose is the same, though - to infuriate one's opponent and put him on the defensive, at the same time, through the tactical use of feigned obtuseness and to use faked naivite as a cover for putting words in the mouth of the enemy.
In her comments made to the group, with a warning in front warning those offended by anti-Wiccan comments to read no further, Raven mentions that given freedom of speech, those who don't like what she has to say have no right to complain. Now, it is an established idiom of American English usage to use the statement "you have no right to complain" to mean "you have no grounds for complaint", and such a usage is scarcely confined to American usage. Yet, watch the nitpicking in a number of posts, as those flaming Raven decide to go for the literal, rather than customary meaning, and act as if Raven has said that they have no right to post complaints - going on to complain about HER hypocrisy !
Let us also point out, to anyone unfamiliar with the antics of the Usenet crowd, that a popular tactic for dealing with those who insist on writing things that one doesn't like is to get a pack of supporters and keep e-mailing and phoning complaints to their internet service providers, until said providers discontinue service to the one complained about, just to avoid further harassment. This is not "free expression", this is an attempt to deprive another of access to a forum in which to engage in such expression. This form of censorship is known as "plug pulling" by some, "complaining" by others. If someone says that one doesn't have the right to engage in that, just because one doesn't like the views expressed - I'm inclined to agree.