[dang]

> not everybody wants to hear

No, but you're reading this thread inaccurately, in my view, if you think the rage and snark side is in the minority, let alone so weak that it needs additional protecting.

I appreciate that you're concerned about the integrity of the discourse—we share that—but you don't seem to consider the costs of what I just called the rage and snark side. Those are considerable, and probably the largest risk to this community.

If people start getting rah-rah and kumbaya about everything, I don't think we'll have trouble adapting how we manage this site. The goal is the same either way—substantive discussion. But we humans deceive ourselves into believing that the merely bilious is substantive, when it's not.

[stonesvsglass]

I don't support any follow-up comments ala "fuck you" etc. - however, if you consider this sort of "accurate" representation of how things go already as harmful, you know the reason of president-elect Trump.

...just because you don't want to hear it, doesn't mean it does not accurately describe a situation. And the OP was not overly mean - just very concise in describing a typical SV situation.

...I don't have any stakes in convincing you, nevertheless I considered it an overreaction worthwhile to react myself