i am indeed talking about:

The assignment operator itself happens to be both in scalar and in list context. It produces both a list for the list, and a scalar

from 719455. The antecedent I intended for "it" was, however, "the assignment operator itself" and not the list on the right. In the "list for the list" part, the first "list" is the list value assigned through the side effect of the assignment operator and the second "list" is the list on the left which is assigned the value.

I think that covers the possible misunderstandings. I'm sorry if I wasn't more clear, or if I still need to be more clear. I may have misunderstood which part you misunderstood.