I think this is a product of how humans think in general. A topic may remind someone of a related topic and then that gets brought up. Someone may say something that isn’t quite right and it gets pointed out that’s wrong. But then there will be some nuance to that point and now you’re discussing the nuance.

A great example of this is the fact that when I read your post I was reminded of my biggest complaint about HN and was about to write what that is. It’s very hard to stay on point. Here’s an example of a type of interaction that illustrates this.

There are a number of times that I’ve responded to someone to point out what I think is an error. People will then assume what my opinion on the topic is and comment. My comment, logically speaking, didn’t imply any beliefs on my part. I just pointed out something that is wrong. But we sometimes tend to make assumptions on what someone says about that person based on past interactions or media influence. And then things start to deviate.

I don’t think anything can be done about this. I think it would make HN too sterile if something were done about it. This phenomenon is part of us being social beings.