[kashunstva]

My perspective: HN tends more toward pedantry than toxicity. But unless one has an extremely fragile ego, perhaps there’s something to learn from sharpening up one’s arguments. I find HN far less toxic than other discussion sites. I don’t doubt there are reflexively toxic contributors here; but a reasonably strong culture keeps it mostly in check.

[jrowen]

Agreed - within a specific context I don't find the comments described in the article to be toxic. Obviously not always the right approach with loved ones but in a mostly pseudonymous space where people largely have a shared understanding of what to expect, those types of comments sound perfectly reasonable. There was no name-calling or unnecessary ad hominems. This is where we come to debate, not to provide emotional support (for the most part, although that can happen as well).

That said, I do still think it's important to soften the language wherever possible, if only to strengthen the impact of your argument. Saying "I think you're wrong" vs. "You're wrong" can represent a world of a difference in how much of the meaning of your message is received and the productivity of the ensuing conversation. Any amount of defensiveness or perceived aggression can quickly snowball and derail.