In response to one of my answers, a user took one part of my answer, declared that my including that one part means that "your answer [is] all about this one weird quirk of this one" part and stated "It honestly seems to me like you're actively trying to confuse people and resisting all suggests that ou [sic] be clear and unconfusing." When I asked for an explanation for what's wrong with my answer, the user referred me to their original comment, which I had already informed them was uninformative, and proceeded to make a bunch of vague assertions.
When I pointed out that the user was refusing to be clear, they said that "I don't know how to be clearer." and said "I can't provide a full cryptography education in a few sentences.", dishonestly suggesting that I was asking for an explanation of cryptography, when I was simply asking that they explain what their comments meant, and presented strawman misrepresentations such as "For example, your second paragraph now asserts that signing has something to do with a process to recover the original signed data from the signature". Then, after spending several comments being rude and evasive, they said "I'm going to give this one more try on the off chance you're actually being honest and not just trolling me."
"off chance" means small. So they are saying there is a small chance I am not a troll, i.e., I most likely am a troll. How is accusing someone of deliberately trying to confuse people and probably being a troll, while engaging in dishonesty, acceptable behavior?