[ubermonkey]

>You got too emotional when reading my response.

I read a dispassionate rebuttal of your point. Calling the reply "too emotional" is not an okay tactic.

[AznHisoka]

“Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.”

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[dointheatl]

And you just responded to the weaker interpretation of his argument (which is easier to criticize) when you called it "too emotional."

[AznHisoka]

And you responded to the weaker interpretation of my argument. And so we are in a loop.

my orig response was an innocent, curious question while his was an impulsive rant/essay.

[dointheatl]

>You got too emotional when reading my response.

I'm not sure there is any stronger interpretation available here. You're baselessly speculating on gp's emotional state. That is the opposite of "assume good faith."