Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Please don't post personal attacks here, regardless of how you feel about someone. You may not owe people who you feel are psychopaths better, but you owe this community better if you're participating in it. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
"How about "Person A is an X"." Just because I didn't type in those quotations doesn't mean one can interpret it any which way. It is technically a distinction of use-mention fallacy, in context of the response.
Meanwhile, if the above conservative commenter hand-wrings, and outright patronizes/polices another, user about not making public accusations without being able to read in good faith, then they forfeit their standing that a response be held to a higher standard than theirs. They are the one playing moderator. Furthermore, my response merely challenges their logic, and alludes to the fact that many people in this community "feel" and variously describe Altman's psychopathic tendencies, to shine a light on the logic of their argument.
What this community needs is to not rationalize their Silicon-valley techno-conservative political values to suppress strongly dissenting views, and not to abuse the moderator's power by misreading and misreporting people who criticize their prejudiced comments. I am not responsible for their lack of reading skills and not knowing what a use-mention fallacy is.
I'll also note the subtle smooth presumption of telling someone it's really about how they feel. No, I believe things and my specific beliefs may be right or wrong, and at its core it is the actual ad hominem of making one side about subjective feelings rather than evidence-based, rational beliefs the way the ground rules of good faith discussions require in the first place.