[mst]

The thing is ... if it had been sarcasm in the name of snark, I think I'd agree. But it really didn't sound like that, it sounded like sarcasm as a means to distract your attention from the quiet, soft sound of heartbreak that heralds the shattering of a dream.

That's what, I think, led to such negative responses. You read snark; we read a cry for help from the darkness and imagined a child who'd trusted your site on the verge of tears over a broken promise.

Anguish, anger and assholery can all sound very similar, and I'm sympathetic to your definition of that level of sarcasm as uncivil, but I suspect that the perception gap here is why most of this conversation seems to involve people talking past each other.

Or maybe I'm misinterpreting it completely; conversation's fun like that ...