I disagreed, to a degree with the original comment but to be fair, he wasn’t bashing or downplaying women. I’m making the assumption that it’s a male based on username.

He did, however, pointed to some interesting things and areas which should be explored and debated but your comment, on the other hand, is really aggressive and does not open the conversation to a positive discourse.

Instead of saying “vague pseudo-facts”, why not find some and post as counter point?

And who said HN is better than Reddit? Perhaps more moderated but we’re all human which means we have shitty opinions rooted in nonsense. This doesn’t stop if you register on HN, we just have shitty HN opinion instead of shitty Reddit opinion.

And most importantly, you buried the whole point of your comment because of your anger: the winner of the race did something amazing and should be 100% celebrated. She beat the competition, regardless who was there (male vs female). She can’t control who she runs against. Hence, she deserves to be a champion without an asterisk.

Downvoted were for your tone (I didn’t down nor up vote), not the content of your comment.

Today you're the best. There might be a good argument for your opinion, but today yours is the best one.

Now I'm interested, what exactly in the parent comment is a "pseudo fact"?

> Having male only trophies is most often redundant because 99% of overall winners are male. That's just life. From time to time, an high/elite level female runner shows up when there are no elite male runner and she takes the overall winner. And that only happens in niche races (niche being every race longer than a marathon and some smaller city races). Ultras are also more likely to have DNFs (did not finish).

This entire paragraph.