Don't make things up or project based on your perception of tone.

It's not (just) my perception, most socially aware people would interpret the sign off:

> So in response you select the most naive take?

As well as your reply to me now, as having an unduly negative tone... at least, given the lack of substance or importance.

(Ironically, I have less of hang up on meaningful arguments delivered with edge than most people.)

▲

an hour ago | parent | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

bigyabai an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

They're being rude, but right. Burying your head in the sand is not an intellectually gratifying response to barbazoo's comment, and the actual meat of their answer ("because they're cool") is obviously incorrect.

Both are unprofessional comments, but only the original was dishonest. The "too many comments" shtick is a thought terminating cliche that shouldn't be encouraged on HN.

	▲	mlyle 24 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		People demand airshows because they're cool. The military participates in airshows because it's good for morale, because it helps showcase capabilities, because it's good PR for military expenditures, and because it's good for recruitment. All of these effects are mostly because it's cool. The other people flying in airshows are flying there because they love aviation and because it's cool (not so much the money :)
	▲	BoorishBears an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Again, they're not even right if we're going maximum correctness here... Maximally correct answer is "there are many reasons with complex interplay", and those reasons do include the fact it's cool! Being cool has interplay with morale, recruitment, and even their ham-fisted attempt at referencing geopolitics. They'd be "more right" if they said in addition, but they just straight up said "No." (Also where did you read a too many comments shtick?)