Two thoughts:

(1) the long-term health of the community has to be the priority here. Otherwise it won't survive—all the default internet vectors point the other way;

(2) it's possible to push back, express skepticism, etc., in way that respects the person on the other side of the conversation and isn't just venting the impulse to shame the other.

You guys (<-- by which I really mean all of us in this community) need to remember that you're not just addressing a $BigCo abstraction when you post replies to someone else's comments. You're talking to an individual human. Sure, they may be working for a large and powerful company; but in the HN context the power dynamic is actually quite the reverse. If you put yourself in their shoes for a minute, it shouldn't be so hard to recognize that.

Like I said upthread, I agree with you on the underlying issue. But we also have to preserve the container, and the latter has to take precedence.

It’s not about bigco at all in my eyes.

At the end of the day, if you want intellectual curiosity and openness, bad-faith dishonesty needs to be weeded out; thought-provoking and honest conversation should be promoted, regardless of where the contributor is employed.

The problem isn’t working for Microsoft. The problem is dishonesty.

You’re treating the root comment with kid gloves because it’s from a Microsoft employee. Please don’t do that.