It's up to the writer to communicate their thoughts clearly. A writer should only blame their audience for not understanding if their statements are obviously unambiguous. However, you were writing on an online forum about a topic that was only tangentially related to the subject, began your post with an inflammatory statement, never clearly stated what you were even talking about, and then blamed the lack of comprehension on the other end. If you're communicating in text to strangers, it's best to err on the side of being overly specific, especially when speaking about a different topic than the one being currently discussed.
Sorry if this comes off as harsh, but people blaming their poor communication on others is a pet peeve of mine.
However, you were writing on an online forum about a topic that was only tangentially related to the subject
The article was about a button, and what Tolkien's estate did about it. I guess you could say "only tangentially."
If you're communicating in text to strangers, it's best to err on the side of being overly specific
More specificity is fine. Specificity is not the issue here. If you knew of the contents of the button, the comment makes sense. If you read the comment, then looked at the link and the article, the comment makes sense. I draw the line at those reading only the 1st sentence and not bothering to make sense of the 2nd and 3rd sentence. How is that any different from a dog parsing an angry utterance from a human containing 'Fido'?
Sorry if this comes off as harsh, but people blaming their poor communication on others is a pet peeve of mine.