I wish I could upvote this more. I would be willing to bet a number of such comments did not even read the article and responding based on impulse with their gripe about modern society du-jour.
Occasionally, they will misunderstand this as Y happening and they’ll explain that.
In the best universe, they will misunderstand X having happened as Y having happened and explain it even though Y did not happen.
The existence of this last characteristic makes me trust post hoc explanations very little. Explanations should make falsifiable predictions. It is easy to fit the facts with a false thesis.
It's the offensive part that's not encouraged here - and I dig that.
He strives to lower the temperature of discussions that get too heated. He tries (and mostly succeeds) to get folks to stay on topic and civil. He keeps the site free from trash or astro-turfing. And he does all this alone.
> complete incompetence/corruption within HN
This is a strong claim. If you have evidence of it, show us. Or retract it.