Thanks for the thoughtful response. I have similar reservations about PG's piece† it's application on HN suffers from overuse, compounded by invoking it has the cover of being authored by PG himself. I do think there's room for disagreement, though, and I'm confident we have the same goal: earnest, quality discussion here on HN. Cheers!

† I don't disagree the phenomenon exists, is problematic, and something to be on the lookout for, just that I don't think it's as interesting as its many references may suggest.