[freedomben]

fwiw I thought this comment was the snarky one, not GP. Given that this snarky comment also tried to call out GP for snark and refer to the HN guidelines against snark, it also became highly ironic. I would guess that's why you've been downvoted.

[bayindirh]

That comment is not my best by any means, and I see where you’re coming from, and respect your view. Thanks for bringing it up.

However, language is both subjective and culture dependent (plus, words doesn’t carry tone and sound). If somebody asks the same question the same way in my native language to my face, it’s not only snarky, but it’s rude (and mildly offensive depending on the context).

I don’t think I’m expected to know the all possible cultural styles, and take anything and everything kindly and politely, all day, every day.

Henceforth, I tone matched the comment according to my perception. I might be correct or wrong according some dominant discussion culture here, and people may perceive me the snarkier one according to their cultures. I can’t judge them, but this doesn’t change the fact that the style of question is rude on my side, and I have the right to respond equally (to my perception).

Normally I’m a much softer person and don’t write sharp comments, so that one is an exception.

Lastly I’ll be posting a research tome on caffeine addiction/withdrawal to the person who asked, so you might one to follow that thread too.

Have a nice day :)

[freedomben]

All make sense to me! And yes for sure there was some snark in the comment you replied to. If it helps, the specific part of your comment that I felt elevated it to a higher level was the reference to their username, which was ad homimen/personal snark, whereas both theirs and the first part of your reply was snark directed at the research or the methods.

Likewise have a nice day, and thanks for the tip on the research tome! I'm definitely interested to see it :-)