Still wondering how you decided that particular message deserved this uncharitable response.

I assume you only read a few messages here, stopped and decided to attack that one.

Surely there were other messages here less deserving of charity?

Unfortunately I didn't have time to load them all into a spreadsheet, perform sentiment analysis, and pick a few based on a proprietary scoring algorithm. Like most people, I scroll HN when I have some free time, and respond to a few comments here and there that catch my eye. It seems to me that you're seeing a deeper meaning to what you see as an "attack".

If you would like to point out a few comments that are hurling blame at children, I'm more than happy to offer my opinion on those as well.

	▲	staticman2 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		If that comment was so bad I don't get why your initual complaint shifted from GP having "a subtext you're not saying out loud." But this became when the discussion continued "hurling blame on children." Which is presented as text not subtext? And something about implicit logic? You sure put a lot of work into deciding why that of all comments deserved ire.