[PoignardAzur]

> rhetoric taking on levels of hostile zealotry like the linked post

Honestly, this feels like bad faith.

The article explicitly says "this is a rant for catharsis, not a serious argument" and ends with a list of caveats and "okay actually it's more complicated" bits left out of the article.

Even if you take it seriously, you're implying that it's representative of the average Rust advocacy post, but this is easily the strongest piece of rhetoric I've seen in Rust advocacy.

You're implying that "levels of hostile zealotry" are commonplace, but every post I've seen advocating Rust on HN has been polite; for every post saying "this is a problem that Rust could solve" there's at least one answer saying "I like Rust but in this case maybe the costs of refactoring would be too high".

> inability or resistance to recognizing faults

Again, that hasn't been my experience at all.