Can you please explain what appears to be a contradiction below?

below is an excerpt from first page of the March ’24 newsletter.

“Similarly, RMDs from inherited Roth
IRAs can only be aggregated with
RMDs from Roth IRAs inherited from
the same decedent.”
My question is why would a taxpayer who is not required to take RMDs from an inherited Roth before the 10th year after death actually do so?

Below is a copy of a Q and A from this forum from April 2023 which seems to contradict what was written in the March ’24 newsletter

“Example:

Roth IRA owner died in 2020 at age 85 (after the first Secure Act of 2019 was passed). Now that Secure Act 2.0 was signed into law late Dec ’22, what would be the Required Minimum Distribution (RMD) for 2023 for a non-spouse beneficiary?

ANSWER
The 10-year rule applies, but there are no annual RMDs for years 1–9 because this was a Roth IRA. Even though the Roth IRA owner died at age 85, he is considered to have died before reaching his RMD (since Roth IRA owners are not subject to lifetime RMDs). So, the only RMD would be the full inherited Roth IRA balance that must be withdrawn by the end of the 10th year after death—in this case by the end of 2030.

This is a big advantage that inherited Roth IRAs have over traditional inherited IRAs.”