The parent comment was a pretty clumsy dog whistle to paranoid folks who believe Gates to be a sinister puppetmaster who is unleashing pandemic disease on the world. The Infowars audience is very receptive to this unfounded notion. Since the commenter is concerned about the popularity of his posts, I proposed a suitable audience that would be more receptive and would provide the desired positive response.
Did you just see the words "Bill Gates" and jump to your own conclusions, then call out the parent poster based on your jumped-to conclusions?
The article is posted on a mainstream site and describes how Bill wants additional funding to research preventative measures against future pandemics. What is the dog whistle? Where is the sinister puppetmaster references? Where does it say Bill Gates is unleashing a pandemic?
The original article has nothing to do with Bill Gates, but the commenter in this thread posted this wholly unrelated article, pronouncing it "Related", without any other comment to explain the context of the linked article or how it relates to the original story. You need look no further than the other (also heavily downvoted) commenters in this thread to see who heard the dog whistle loud and clear.
Where does the puppet master/unleashing pandemic stuff come into play?
The article of Bill Gates talking preventative measures against future pandemics (including smallpox, which funny enough is related to smallpox vials), has literally 0 conspiracy-related things in it. How can that even be a dogwhistle?
If you post a story about cancer, and I post a semi-related story of Bill talking about cancer prevention, am I also dog-whistling? Is anything that has Bill in it now a dog whistle?
Edit to add: The linked artile even has smallpox in the title. How you can say it is "wholly" unrelated is baffling.
It seems like you've been on HN long enough to know the guidelines so I won't parrot them. I think these type of "assuming worst intent" type of comments don't help the community honestly, they just piss people off more and further polarization. I believe it would have been better had you simply left off the "Infowars" part of your comment.
You seem to be the conspirator here, the linked article from hunterb123 makes no claims about Bill Gates (as a puppetmaster or anything else) but simply quotes what he has been saying at some event.
Can you elaborate why you added this part to your comment?