Umm I guess you could ignore the comment then. Part of what I like about HN is the tangential discussion and the personal experience that commenters share.
If "you should ignore it"/"just downvote it" was sufficient, we wouldn't need site guidelines or moderators. Off-topic Amazon hate will always win the upvote wars unless people are principled.
Did I come off as hating Amazon? I'm thankful for my time there. I learned buckets. I specifically called out several things about Amazon I really liked.
I'm at a different place in my life and the things I commented on are fair criticisms. (Critiquing something is not the same as hating something. I have plenty of media I critique that I also enjoy.)
Your net judgement came off as mildly negative, but the structure of merely listing complaints about the place, many of which have been discussed here ad nauseam, with no substantive connection to the article, is hater catnip.
We have site guidelines and moderators, neither of which seem to have taken exception to somebody posting honestly about their experience relating to the article topic. Maybe you don't need to be sheriff of HN for this?
I thought it was a useful and interesting comment. If you've had your fill of some subtopic, do what I do: keep scrolling.
There are moderators for egregious indisputable violations, just like there are police for lawbreaking. But there are also murky or less clear-cut cases that nevertheless clearly degrade the quality of the discussion over time, just like there are lots of mean things people do to each other in the real world that appropriately are not punished by the police. The way these are dealt with is by telling the person they shouldn't do what they've done, and by arguing to others that it shouldn't be supported.
Or another way we signal it is by downvoting things. So maybe check out the color of your posts in this thread and consider that you have confused "thing I don't like" with "degrades the discussion".