You mean he wasn't being clueless with that point of view? Like the majority of the population who can't do 8th grade math let alone understand the complexities of out financial systems that lead to the ever expanding wealth inequality?

Or do you mean we shouldn't be allowed to call out people we notice are clueless because it might hurt their feelings and consider it "fulmination"? But then how will they know they might be wrong if nobody dares calls them out ? Isn't this toxic positivity culture and focus on feelings rather than facts, a hidden form of speech suppression, and a main cause in why people stay clueless and wealth inequality increases? Because they grow up in a bubble where their opinions get reinforced and never challenged or criticized because of an arbitrary set of speech rules will get lawyered and twisted against any form of criticism?

Have you seen how John Carmack or Linus Torvalds behaves and talks to people he disagrees with? They'd get banned by HN rules day one.

So I don't really see how my comment broke that rule since there's no fulmination there, no snark, no curmudgeonly, just an observation.