I was reading the following article at http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/benjamin-franklin-on-the-morals-of-chess, and on the last paragraph, Ben Franklin says "Snatch not eagerly at every advantage offered by his unskilfulness or inattention; but point out to him kindly, that by such a move he places or leaves a piece in danger and unsupported; that by another he will put his king in a perilous situation, etc.".
But he also says "If you touch a piece, you must move it somewhere; if you set it down, you must let it stand.", so if my opponent moves his queen to a spot where I could kill her, what would be the advantage of pointing out that his queen is in danger, since he cannot move his queen back to a safe spot (because he set it down, and therefore must let it stand)?
Thank you for any help. All help is greatly appreciated.