Your first paragraph seems to hint this group of people should have done even more than they did: not sharing their opinion until explicitly asked. Implying tha

Your first paragraph seems to hint this group of people should have done even more than they did: not sharing their opinion until explicitly asked. Implying that they may ought to have given the feedback with even more sensitivity is exactly the problem, it’s asking too much of the frank/sincere/mature person who to placate an adult with an unhealthy perspective of their life. I’m not sure I explained my point very clearly, but what I mean is essentially: how far must we be expected to go to anticipate and maneuver around such sensitive souls? Edit: rereading your comment, I think I didn’t respond to a key area of confusion / disagreement. Being “fake” versus “being naive or clueless”. Giving feedback that someone comes across as fake could mean that they seem dishonest, but I don’t think that’s the obvious interpretation in a situation like this. Being overly positive might seem fake on account of naivety or cluelessness. Any of these - naïveté, cluelessness, or dishonesty in communication - are all things that a professional should be corrected on when appropriate (like asking for honest feedback).