To give an extreme example, these two comments in different threads are basically the same in terms of sentiment, prose and effect, however, one criticizes the CCP for their genocide of Uighurs, and the other criticizes the Queen. The difference here is one comment is at the top of the discussion while the other got the user banned.[0][1]
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24881093
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32770904
The "likeliest explanation" of ignorance for [0] here doesn't hold since moderation has posted comments on the topic and again, it's the top comment of an extremely popular thread.
Here are some more examples of popular but off-topic for HN comments against Putin and Cloudflare respectively.
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6371615
[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32707053
and their equivalents in this thread:
[4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32771398
[5] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32769645
[6] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32769550
Dang, a million kudos to you for curating the site, but this topic has been an absolute train-wreck and I hope you can at least take it off the front page.
- Attacking an entity (CCP/cloudflare) is not against the rules afaik, but attacking a person is not allowed (hate speech?).
- The comment on Putin is less on attacking him as a person, but more on the state and the actions that he took.
- Attack on an entity/concept (monarchy) might be "user-moderated" via flag and downvotes if it's repetitive and bring no new information or insights.
- Occasions do matter. For example, it might not be appropriate to attack a person while the person is suffering from severe illness or recently died.