[teddyh]

This may or may not be a real thing, but most or all the actual examples the article gives are terrible. Disagreeing over food quality, pointing out obvious PR stunts, and revealing to a friend that they were duped into overpaying for what they thought was “vintage” but actually wasn’t, is not being contrary just for the sake of being contrary.

I have no problem with the general idea of the article; I would not be surprised if there was a general common problem with some people being overly critical or trying to put down anything you say, but the actual examples they give are all terrible.