Ignoring the critics allows them to swell in self-importance and gather a crowd around them.

Why did you choose to pressure someone else here to ignore “HN’s mental illness” and let it fester, rather than to pressure HN’s commenters here to stop being poisonous to others?

Because I've been in similar situations. There's a saying: "Don't wrestle with pigs because you both end up covered in shit, but they enjoy it." Also, Admiral Ackbar: "It's a traaaap.".

> Ignoring the critics allows them to swell in self-importance and gather a crowd around them.

Strongly disagree. Making your case and setting the story straight is of course reasonable, but in a way it gives power to your critics. Often it can establish power/dominance better to just be like "Who the fuck cares what you think? Replying to you is beneath me." But to do that without even saying it. You don't come off as an ass, and they are just howling on the internets. So ... ghosting.

EDIT> By all means call out the bad behaviour, but like a comedian would, not like an engineer. An engineer answers point by point and tries to make a rational case -- too much effort and it won't stop the hate. A comedian says "So, these morons said X, look how stupid they are ... and that's why I don't read comments anymore." applause. <- low effort and deliciously dismissive.

As much as I try not to, I'll indulge in leaving (deliciously) snarky comments at times (though less on HN). But, do they really move the conversation forward? Comments for those that are reading for low-brow comedic value and condescention may get more made-up Internet points and feel good, but personally, if there's a rational engineering answer to be made, I'll try and give that (eg: Kubernetes doesn't scale past 500 nodes very well because of X due to condition Y that I dealt with.) rather than being dismissive (Kubernetes? More like POOPERnetes! amirite? lolololol)

Readers can decide for themselves wether or not, eg, kubernetes is right for them.

Additionally:

> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.

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

Focusing on personal behavior is a bit more productive than trying to shape an internet community that's open to the public to some arbitrary standard of toxicity.

Who is pressuring who here?

After reading the first post, my thought was "is this really the hill you want to die on?" Dropping the always-awkward HR onboarding bits and focusing on signs that the system you just signed up to work on might be beyond repair would be more interesting.

For what it's worth op, I never saw the criticisms, just the original article. Replying is like a Streisand effect. If you must reply, replying less directly might serve you better.