No I am not. What you're demonstrating is exactly the basis for why the new usage is spreading.

Poster 2 has raised a disagreement with the original claim. There was no implied rule. Poster 3 used the claim of it being an exception to imply a third rule that neither of the first two posters had claimed, as opposed to making a statement where the exception demonstrated the existence of a rule in the first place.

If you're going to make false claims and lie about my intent, then at least don't be entirely wrong while doing it.

If you're going to continue this thread you can talk to yourself - I have no interest in continuing a discussion when you start lying about my intent.