| I think it is a free-thinking rebellion against a certain type of conformity. I think that's a good thing, something that should be welcomed. You don't know what's honest, hostile or pompous, only your interpretation. Pretend that's the truth? Don't impose that. It's even harder through text when you don't have tone of voice, body language, other context. So you should be careful before leaping to accuse a hostile intent, don't you think? Why should my comment be any less valid than the question. I don't think the question was bad at all. Don't judge stuff like that. Your misinterpreting hostile intent should be a violation of the HN guidelines. That's not responding to the strongest version of what I said, that's misrepresenting to a straw man so you can hate on it. It's not my problem if you need to hate on something. That pal has nothing to do with me, so don't make it about me, huh? Pretty clear I would think. Also, "controversial" and "banal" depends on who you are, and context. When you put it like that...inspires me to think people maybe don't like having something obvious, but off-message pointed out to them? They want an answer, don't tell them to expand their mind. But...teach people how to fish, not feed them, right? |