Can you please make your substantive points without name-calling? There's a site guideline that asks you to do just that.
"When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. 'That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3' can be shortened to '1 + 1 is 2, not 3."
In spirit, this rule should hold even if you aren't attacking the author directly but are disparaging the value of their perspective.
That is simply unnecessary and you can just refute the point directly.
How is that worse than people literally calling each other's comments bullshit on HN?
Examples: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6805295 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5111959 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6410617 .. and many more
Kind of like a microagression: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microaggression, I think...
Human language and idioms are hard to create rulesets for. Probably "name-calling" is too specific, but "microagression" may not be understood by all. However it is sad if we need to lawyer the guidelines.
However, in this context, calling their argument "utter nonsense" is utterly unnecessary and only serves to up the ante.
"When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. 'That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3' can be shortened to '1 + 1 is 2, not 3."
We don't want name-calling (in this sense) because it leads to dumber, nastier internet discussion.
It's also particularly easy to avoid. If you take out its first sentence, the GP comment loses nothing but hostility and becomes a far better HN contribution.
I was pointing out to the commenter that while it was not technically as hominem, it is still not acceptable and doesn’t add anything to the discussion.