"Of course she was being nasty. Jumping into a someone’s thread she knows nothing about to call them a drunk and patronise them."
Well... yes, that what you do on a forum like this, you jump on threads, that's the intention when someone posts. They want people to jump in and join the conversation. And of course she doesn't anything about the thread..that's why she replied the way she did. And when other people were trying to ask OP for clarification, she was getting irritated.
'Patronising' is your interpretation, but that's not necessarily the intent of @pinkdelights reply though, and I didn't read it as patronising. OP did sound a little drunk tbh.
"I didn’t agree with OP but I would never be so rude. They could be vulnerable or maybe an addict. But that poster was really not helpful and could be very damaging to a vulnerable person looking for help on here. So no I don’t agree with it and I think they were nasty here."
What's to agree or disagree to? She wasn't even disagreeing with her point, she was saying that OP hadn't made her point very well. Some of us would actually like to hear OP out and understand what she means as opposed to just looking to disagree.
I beg to differ that you'd never be so rude... you were far ruder than that in your replies. She wasn't nasty, didn't name call and I doubt she was looking to damage someone vulnerable. You were out of order calling her a prick, there's no need for abuse. But we shouldn't derail OPs thread anyway. Hopefully she'll be able to help the rest of us understand what she's d like to discuss.