Spell more out in case a total moron is reading it ;-)

psf/silly.md

@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ That's garbage. It doesn't even pass a "sane person" test, misreading the plain
 
 I have never, in my life, addressed the concept of "reverse sexism". I did happen to use the phrase once, but only by way of that the phrase was copied verbatim as part of quoting a post I was replying to. I said nothing about it. In fact I reject the _doctrine_ of "reverse sexism", but never said a word of my own about the doctrine.
 
-I did briefly address the _doctrine_ of "reverse racism", [here](https://discuss.python.org/t/im-leaving-too/58408/10). Read it for yourself. I explicitly largely _rejected_ the doctrine. That cannot be sanely read as "defending" it.
+I did briefly address the _doctrine_ of "reverse racism", [here](https://discuss.python.org/t/im-leaving-too/58408/10). Read it for yourself. I linked there to a "109% woke" article that uncategorically rejected the "reverse recism" doctrine entirely. And explicitly said I stiil thought that article largely made good sense. So, sure, I defended the article - but defending an article that utterly rejected the doctrine cannot be sanely read as defending the doctrine. There's nothing difficult, subtle, or remotely arguable about this. Again, the claimed offense is plain garbage.
 
 It's true that I also objected to the PSF dogmatically insisting that's the only possible "good faith" view. The CoC in fact requires respecting other views, and I do. I'm not the hypocrite here.