Congratulations, you are making good progress. You will find the moderators are generous in measuring "quality" posts. I expect that this one of yours counts. It's just the ones where someone simply says "I agree" to every post they read, those shouldn't count. (And any messages in the "Introduce Yourself" forum, those don't count either for some reason).
Yes, that was quite a reaction that you caused by suggesting it is OK to soak revenue stamps off of documents. I would expect you would get a similar reaction if you found this cover in an attic and soaked the stamps off the cover, and cut apart the three 12c stamps because you needed a #17 stamp to fill a space in your album.

Postal history collectors would want to tie you up to a stake for punishment. This is a rare 1855 usage to Russia and a scarce 37c rate. The cover (not mine) is worth much more historically and monetarily than the individual stamps off cover. Revenue collectors feel the same way about their documents. Perhaps even more strongly because of the scarcity of said intact documents.
I can't always recognize a scarce usage from a common usage, so when in doubt, I keep my covers or documents intact rather than soaking the stamps.
I have a lot of stamps with interesting cancels or large multiples where I say, boy, I wish that stamp were still on cover, what a pretty cover that must have been.
That said, I do generally soak (or clip) modern common stamps from ordinary First Class covers, however some people may get upset at me for that, because modern postally used commemoratives on cover are also relatively scarce and 50 years from now there may be a collector of Forever stamps on cover who wishes I hadn't soaked those...