dang is absolutely right and your comment should be downvoted to oblivion. Because if you look, beenpoor made the exact same comment but without couching it in

dang is absolutely right and your comment should be downvoted to oblivion. Because if you look, beenpoor made the exact same comment but without couching it in your poisonous language. benpoor wrote: >Man, you should tone down your reverence :) Which is the same thing in civil terms. (Per the guidelines, something you could say to someone you were having a personal conversation with face-to-face.) For what it's worth, I found numair's comment (GGP you replied to) very worthwhile, I appreciated the time that he took to write it, and was wondering if he was correct! Elsewhere in this thread another commenter, dunkelheit, above wrote "I .. doubt that depictions of the workings of VC firms from this article should be taken at face value." So, we have dunkelheit wondering if it should be taken at face value, we have numair basically stating that he thinks it does: "The behind-the-scenes look at Instacart's latest funding round was really interesting...Again, such an honest look at the inner workings of Andreesen and his colleagues." We have a lot of readers here who can clear up whether numair is correct that this is an accurate and honest look. We have readers who know Marc personally. I guarantee that you will not elicit them to share their thoughts with what you wrote. Instead you could have simply written, "This is so lavishly praising I wonder whether you have been funded by A16z. Do you have a disclosure to make?" As it stands, your comment completely derailed the thread. This is why it should simply have been killed and hidden without any discussion, not due to the content but the exact form you chose to express it in.