I'm complaining about what I wrote in the comment. It wasn't the top comment when I wrote it. That happened after I wrote it. It got a lot of upvotes so I guess people who agree with me were more comfortable upvoting/replying after I wrote it than commenting before me. Maybe because they knew that the comment would attract criticism like yours

Is the complain still relevant now that you have the most votes? To me it seems like HN loves to agree with people whom it thinks are shunned by HN, but in reality you are the voice of HN. Again, as evidenced here after a few minutes of posting your comment.

I suppose it's become an unfortunate header for any comments agreeing with the article. I've never had a comment "succeed" in this fashion before so I wasn't prepared for the decontextualisation. If I could write it again, I would simply write how my experience seems to back up the experience in the article, and miss out my angry meta-commentary.

I've noticed this trend lately on HN of people digging through user history to make some meta commentary about the poster. It's weird. This isn't reddit. Let the statement speak on its' own regardless of who posted it or why.

This is literally evident in the same thread. Just scroll to the top of the page to see the commenter?