I completely disagree. It's a well-formed argument, and he's calling out someone for making a lazy argument.

What's lazy about my argument?

I purposefully stayed away from the "Lazy" word, since I do think that starts to lean towards unhelpful (and if I'm claiming you're unhelpful, then the very least I should do is be helpful myself).

I purposefully used three words to describe your argument: unhelpful, abstract, and too hyperbolic. Which hopefully provides you enough room to move forward with the discussion.

-------

I wouldn't sweat it. I don't think your argument is "lazy". If anything, you're posting in too many threads simultaneously.

If I were in your boat, I'd start cutting out the threads which are least helpful, and start focusing on the discussion threads which are most promising.

Not all discussions are fruitful. If you have fewer discussions, you'll find that you'll naturally result in higher-quality discussions. You shouldn't feel the need to respond to everyone.

I strongly disagree. The parent comment is making a well-reasoned rebuttal against an overly vague/hyperbolic argument ("they'll ban all cell phones next").

IMO it was perfectly reasonable. He was attacking the argument, not the user.

Attacking the user: "IMO, you want to run away to an imaginary world where the events of last Wednesday do not matter"

Agressive tone towards OP: "I'm not going to let you"

They also edited the comment slightly from what you see now.

Does anyone else see the irony in this or is it just me?