>"If you are claiming something without evidence (which you did)" False. >"the responsibility is on you to provide evidence that you are right, not on him to

>"If you are claiming something without evidence (which you did)" False. >"the responsibility is on you to provide evidence that you are right, not on him to prove that you are not." False, and False. He made a claim, it is his responsibility to provide evidence. I already provided evidence for my claim. By the way, absolutely every time someone has said "cite needed", in my experience, they are simply ignoring the evidence presented (as in this case) or will ignore it when presented. This is the tactic of those who cannot make an argument. Since they cannot make an argument they demand a citation and then go on to make a lot of unsupported claims. >"he simply questioned their actions" This is an obvious lie. He made obviously false claims about Apple in a snide and disparaging way. Further, these claims came in response to an article where I'd already cited facts refuting them. >"is to label him as irrational and full of hatred. "Doth protest too much" and all that." Another flat out lie. But of course, you had to tell that lie so you could call me names. You, and his, complete inability to argue the point, and your reliance on name calling shows a severe lack of integrity.. and is why HN is not a place where discussion is tolerated on certain topics. If you dare to defend Apple, you will be called names by Apple haters. (if you don't like the term Apple haters, find a better one, and I'll use it.) By the way, now that you bring it up, yes, its true, I do think that resorting to personal attack as you have is irrational and a result of hatred. I would much rather you just responded to my points, with arguments, rather than dishonesty.