I also downvoted the comment, by the way, so I can explain at least one of the downvotes. It wasn't because I disagree with you. It was because ideological battle is against the HN guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
When your blood is boiling, that's not a good state in which to post to HN. Better to wait for it to cool and then post in the key of curiosity. That's what HN is supposed to be for. I mean, I know you know this. But it's not so easy in practice, especially when you feel like you're under attack and your side is losing [1].
It's in your interest, though. Boiling-blood comments are like a Maxwell's demon who not only has energy to separate molecules into disjoint compartments, but enough left over to keep them buzzing angrily. You'll get upvotes and praise from people who already agree with you, and downvotes and anger from people who already disagree. But what you should be doing instead, if you want to help your own view, is trying to persuade the persuadable. That requires an entirely different, molecule-enticing strategy. A Maxwell's angel perhaps?
---
[1] I don't know how many of us would have guessed it, but one thing has become apparent from trying to keep HN interesting: functioning curiously requires developing one's ability to experience difficult feelings and somehow carry them and not let them drive you into reaction—which is a pretty deep human task. It turns out that simply trying to optimize HN for one thing—curiosity—has counterintuitive consequences, some of which ask a lot of us.
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
I wrote about some of those consequences here, if anyone is interested in reading further: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23308098.