If history is any guide, I will be the one at blame. But compare the words written there against the HN guidelines - who is behaving inappropriately? If one disagrees, or dares ask a question, and people lose their tempers because you're challenging their orthodoxy, who is at fault?
If you were to take a careful read through the words written in that entire thread and ones like it, you might notice a recurring pattern of people knowing things that they have no way of knowing. Knowing what people have done in secret. Knowing what people are thinking. Knowing what people's motives for actions are. Knowing what people really mean, even though their words say something else.
If you're tired of ideological flame wars, consider whether people making things up might have something to do with it.
This is the internet. People are constantly making things up. Actually, this is mostly what people do. I don't think we can do much about that. It isn't against the site guidelines to be wrong.
As for the comment you linked to, it seems like a neutral statement of what the commenter thinks. Maybe they're mistaken, but I don't see how that was a flamewar comment.
After thinking about this for a bit I think I need to think some more, particularly about how to articulate this idea to you in a way that is persuasive. In the meantime, I am going to try to avoid (or at least minimize) further experimentation.
I have to run out the door but am going to write a more substantial reply later. I'm sure you have better things to do than listen to the complaints of some lunatic on the internet, but I think these things have genuine merit and may be more important (and perhaps simpler to improve) than you see, so hopefully you can check back later if even out of curiosity. Thanks...
I'm not sure what do make of the rest of your comment. I'd need to see specific links.