My first comment on this thread was down voted to -4 quickly. That post did nothing seriously wrong on the HN rules. Since only a few users are able to down vote, that down voting had to be heavily or entirely from HN mods.
For more evidence, the down voting was well before any responding comments. That is chicken sh!t behavior from the mods.
So I was attacked, and not for anything I did wrong. Then I responded and defended myself and called names, and that was justified.
For your claim that later I violated the HN rules and, thus, engaged in childish behavior, here is a close analogy: It's against the law to hit someone on the street. But if you do hit someone, then they may hit you back just in self defense, and then they are not violating the law. All I did was to defend myself against a wildly unjustified attack.
It was the HN mods who misbehaved and started the fight, not me.
For my writing, it's clear enough and well organized, for a technical Ph.D. or anyone else. But most blog comments are just really short with little content. Many of my posts to HN have had some content.
And my main post here was of length comparable with the PG post I was responding to.
For making my posts shorter, responses on this thread have shown that even when I explain carefully, number points, give headings, give examples, provide summaries, etc., still many readers don't get it. In part the problem was mentioned by PG in his post -- people can willfully respond critically. Then, as PG mentioned, it can be good to have written enough to be able to point to the part of an original post they just didn't read.
In being so critical of me, you are just doing a playground thing of joining with the majority to form a gang to attack me as a group. It's mob behavior. The posts have not been at all thoughtful about what PG talked about and I responded about on evaluating projects and, instead, have just been gang hostility.
So why was I down voted? Not for length, some use of all caps, some use of sarcasm to try to raise interest and avoid being boring. No, I was down voted because I presumed to mention research to venture capital and, thus, rubbed the ego the wrong way on the VC community and, thus, also the HN mods.
If you don't want to read what I write, then don't.
But HN and I are done. HN is run by some nasty people, and I've had enough. PG has already indicated that he believes that HN has become too big to be easy to manage.
In particular, my UID is dead: The HN mods are angry with me, hostile, making me a target of gang hostility, and down voting just anything, e.g., my little line on the strong law of large numbers and utility functions you responded to.
The shame here is HN's. I'm leaving nothing of value.
But on leaving HN, sure, it's run by some nasty people. That's the shame of HN, YC, and PG.