Asking people not to misread a comment is an exhortation to improve quality of discussion. Endorsing a misreading because you dislike the comment being misread does not improve quality of discussion. You're equivocating between (1) misinterpret and (2) "reject out of hand" in order to make that endorsement work.
You can object to style without having to signal to the community that misinterpreting comments is an accepted practice.
It is not a misread to point out that the comment was loaded with sarcasm and would have been better without it, neither is it one to point out that engaging with that content causes its proliferation.
It is a misread to equivocate between stylistic objections and a criticism that was not about stylistic objections and suggest that both were expressing the same idea.
Endorsing the misread as the cost of doing business in order to reject a comment over stylistic objections signals that misreading is to be embraced as a community value.
Which I didn't do? Nobody misread anything. The comment is objectively nasty and sarcastic, against the rules of the site, and I asked you to consider that substantive comments are best addressed to other substantive comments.
You can object to style without having to signal to the community that misinterpreting comments is an accepted practice.