It's pretty impressive to be reductive against a post with no words! In all seriousness, it's a perfectly legitimate--albeit crass--interpretation, given the e

It's pretty impressive to be reductive against a post with no words! In all seriousness, it's a perfectly legitimate--albeit crass--interpretation, given the expressed intent (none). GGP says "these things ought to be true". Then there's a reply with a bare link saying, effectively, "is" statements are true, "ought" statements are fantasy/desire/normative. The rest of any kind of interpretation requires more context and intent.