It is a valid argument. Certainly it resonated with me. Your original comment made it seem like you were the voice of the community, that a majority or at least a plurality of users want your proposed change. But there’s no indication that they do.

You are incorrect. It is not a valid argument - it's profiling, uncharitable assumptions, and ad-hominem attacks with no actual logic, or any redeeming qualities whatsoever for that matter.

My language was "Would you be willing to consider the possibility" - a polite request. There's no way that a logical person could even read that as either a command or like I was acting as "the voice of the majority" or "a plurality of users" - you pulled that out of thin air

Dang is not a tool or an idiot - if he thinks something is a bad idea, he won't do it. If he thinks that it might be worth doing, he'll think about it. If he needs to poll users, he will.

Their comment started with:

> I would like to make the argument

Which makes this perspective very confusing:

> it seem like you were the voice of the community

There's no indication that they don't either. I guarantee you he's not alone. Simply because I agree with him. If my time here on HN taught me anything it's that I'm not alone and that there's probably many more who agree but don't do so publicly due to the socially unacceptable nature of certain arguments.

My entire life it's been my experience that the less people involved the better things are in general. There's probably an optimal number of people for every community. I don't really know what that number is but I seriously doubt it's in anyone's best interests to exceed it.