Pointing out a post history with a definitive bias in favor of cryptocurrency adds context to the commenter’s statement of finding the author’s bias stupefying.

Pointing out a post history with a definitive bias in favor of cryptocurrency adds context to the commenter’s statement of finding the author’s bias stupefying. It helps other readers of the thread to make a better decision about whether or not the author’s bias is, in fact, stupefying, or merely that janandonly wants to discredit the author for disagreeing with them. By this metric, calling the author’s bias “stupefying” is a personal attack. So either this entire thread is not constructive and your participation is exacerbating the problem or you’re merely providing cover fire for janandonly. Personally, viewing your other comments in this thread, I’m inclined to believe it’s the later.