My issue with your comment is not that it seems to offer unsolicited psychological advice completely out of the blue; it's that it leaves me with an uncanny feeling that it was written by an LLM.

In a thread where I complain about the de-humanisation of my profession by the bots, the irony of having a bot's psychological advice (and so, de-humanising the discussion too) is not lost on me.

If you are really concerned about my being a bot, a quick look at my comment history, going back over a decade, should dispel that concern.

Edit: I once had someone apply for a job and their written communication was pretty caustic. After rejecting their application, I wrote and explained how unprofessional I found their interactions, encouraging them to step back and reconsider how their communication appears from the other side.

To my great surprise, they wrote back and said they had never had anyone give them such feedback and they agreed with my assessment of their interactions. They just had never seen it before. They thanked me for the feedback.

Such interactions are exceedingly rare. But I sometimes offer unsolicited advice on the off chance that said advice can make a difference.

You neither usually write in that style, nor go full shrink mode on people you talk to, so your original comment here is quite unusual in both the contents and the style.

Peace, man.

A person just as opinionated as the tool. People who have very strong opinions about formatting in any direction are suspect.

I do not have any opinion on formatting. My argument is that nobody should.

your argument is about formatting and clearly you feel strongly about it.

this is the difference between the atheist who strongly believes nobody should believe and the atheist who isn't interested and doesn't care

Yeah, I'm in the "not interested" and "don't care" camp, with the addition of "please don't come at me with your bots who would tell me what to believe and what not to believe".

If someone wants to use a linter, I have no problem with that. I don't, and I don't want others forcing one on me, especially so as most of its "results" are straight in "this doesn't matter either way" category (in my example: two spaces instead of one, replacing quotes) and the rest make my code verifiably worse (folding a list in one line).

unwillingness to go with the flow without big arguments is what I'm talking about

I think, generally speaking, the decision to enforce a linter in CI/CD pipelines is well within a project lead’s or technical director’s purview, and there seems to be a pretty broad consensus that they add value, so they’ll almost always be in CI/CD pipelines. So just use the same linter locally and format on save so you catch any issues like your comment getting folded example.

There are some really bad linters out there like Rubocop so if they have had experience with those I get it.