> Any comment pointing out hypocrisy is valuable and interesting in my opinion. I prefer to disregard the opinions of hypocrites.
That's actually a pretty closed minded position. I don't think there's a single person who isn't a hypocrite in some small way, even ascetics living alone in the desert. You'll disregard all of them?
Hypocrisy doesn't logically invalidate anyone's arguments or positions, those need to be evaluated on their own. If they make good points but fail to live up to them, it only demonstrates their own personal moral failings.
But I think it's also a mistake to count "publishing something about deleting Facebook on a website with a Facebook integration" as hypocrisy. Authors usually aren't the ones making implementation decisions of the platforms the publish on, and are probably not even aware of most of them.
> Honest question, do you think the same content with same title with a different domain rather than 'medium.com' could not reach similar popularity on HN?
HN isn't the world.
I think it's a waste of time for an author to make the avoidance of publishing platforms with Facebook integrations a priority. It would be an act of foolish, unpragmatic purism, akin to a lot of the stuff Richard Stallman does. It's more important that they argue persuasively and widely to convince the implementors to avoid such integrations.