If it's actually a fact, then you don't get to agree or disagree with it.

I believe he/she was using "agree with it" as shorthand for "judge that it is a good thing".

You are not stating "the fact" you are stating patent nonsense.

Maybe so, but you've crossed into attacking and name-calling, which is a violation of the site guidelines no matter how right you are. Moreover it's unsubstantive to just declare "nonsense" without explaining anything to the reader. Please don't post like this to HN.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

> Maybe so, but you've crossed into attacking and name-calling

Calling a declaration patent nonsense is not "name-calling". Stuff which is "attacking and name-calling" however include:

* insinuating that the IRS rejects pre-filling declaration because they "would make less money" despite them having supported that effort

* declaring that tax declaration is "like a poker game" and that it's "just a fact" is

* insulting other commenters, as ransom1538 has done and I have not

> Moreover it's unsubstantive to just declare "nonsense" without explaining anything to the reader.

Why would I need to substantiate a disagreement with an unsubstantiated assertion?

It is name-calling in the sense that the HN guidelines use the term, and you need to follow the rules here regardless of how badly someone else is breaking them.