It’s not often I disagree with you @Vineeto but on this occasion I do!
I think you are rather assuming that I was triggered….I know I’m a feeling being but it doesn’t mean that just because I say or do anything , it means that I must have been highly triggered. Where is the evidence of feelings of “justified indignation”, other than what is being read into my text (following some logic of “he bothered to write, he made an objection to it, he wrote in a stern manner, he’s a feeling being, → therefore he was triggered”). It certainly wasn’t an LGBT issue either I just don’t think we should have people openly making murder jokes - are we calling even that actualist morality?
Also, I don’t see any clear indication that it was a spoof. Unless you mean he wasn’t serious that he would actually kill someone - I did realise that that part wasn’t meant literally! 
I still think it’s abhorrent to imply that you would kill someone because of their identity on a forum about perpetuating peace-on-earth.
As to your other points, I don’t regard someone who makes no apparent effort to be happy/harmless (if not the opposite) to be a “fellow actualist”. Besides which I wasn’t calling for him to be barred or similar, other than personally asking him about it (and openly wondering why this post had been taken completely without issue by anyone). I invited him to check himself, is all.
I did notice afterwards that the post was written 2 years ago, which if I’d known I probably wouldn’t haven’t bothered (not even sure if Johnny still participates here?).
I could have easily “kept my hands in pockets” in this case if I had felt the need to prove some sort of non-triggerability, but I didn’t because I didn’t feel particularly triggered (at most it could be called a mental/cognitive trigger rather an emotional one).
In other words, if this was a “trigger” it would have to have been said to be extremely minor as there were no significant feelings or chemicals that powered my actions (otherwise indeed, I wouldn’t have posted it).
Again I don’t see why this kind of behavior is mutely accepted, regardless of the “statute of limitations” supposedly being up! 
It’s an interesting situation because obviously I want to be a good actualist, and in a way you are someone who validates if that is the case (and in this case I’ve been given somewhat of a reprimand!). So I don’t want to skip over what you said, but I also want to be sincere and honestly relay my internal world as I always try to do.
Are you trying to say that it’s best for an actualist to not express any thoughts or opinions basically until they become free?