I don't get this type of structure or fear of being "judged" when addressing articles. When you say this: > What's with the judgement? How does one feel judge

I don't get this type of structure or fear of being "judged" when addressing articles. When you say this: > What's with the judgement? How does one feel judged by the writer of an article who doesn't know the reader. It's a writing device addressing the reader as if they were physically there, but of course they are not. It feels like eminently sensible advice to "save money", I don't see how anyone can disagree with that, but of course there are a legion of specific circumstances that would prevent someone from being able to do so - none of which the writer can know, which consequently means they are not "judging" the reader. How has it become a thing to feel that some sort of judgement over preferred patterns of behaviour is negative. If everything is written in just plain "of course all choices are good choices" then conversation/writing is inherently uninteresting. Of course, one does not have to agree with the point of view of the article. Ultimately, it's not as if any individual reader is going to be deeply emotionally damaged by the random "judgements" of a writer on the Internet surely?