Here you are, This is the context:
...
Satisfied Now? Op has included two links, I analyzed both. He has suggested re-considering Drive chain and Ln, I did it. Anything wrong from my side?
I can see your post being both on and off topic. Even though you are speaking for gmax (which is a bit weird and you could be totally wrong in your assessment of his words), you are addressing the first part of the topic, which is "about criticisms from the past (on Drivechain) from respected Bitcoin experts." The parts about Ethereum and your own "one-way sidechain solution" are off-topic.
Some moderators take the approach that so long as a post contains at least one on-topic element, even if the rest is irrelevant, then the post as a whole is deemed to be "on-topic." Some take the reverse approach. I don't think there's an absolute standard here.
I suppose you'll have to wait for clarification from gmax (or achow) as neither of us actually know what he's (they're) thinking.
I strongly disagree with your idea of on-topic/off-topic.
It is absolutely impossible to have a technical discussion to remain solely jailed in what OPs say or think! It is
technical for the god sake, and it comes with analysis and debates and surprises and descriptions and alternatives without such elements what would be a technical discussion after all?
Somebody starts a topic about LN and Drivechain experiments and bitcoin scaling ... Greg or Andrew expect what? People praising them for LN and saying nothing else? Just sending greetings for LN? Why?