Oh please. Spare me your patronising claptrap. Had I not addresses your specific points, you'd have happily accused me of ignoring them!
Here's a suggestion for you: stop assuming that your lofty air of wisdom is all that's required for people to accept your pronouncements without question. I'm sure it impresses the kids, but I've been around a little longer.
All you've done is claim that Windows without support is cheaper than Linux with support. It's an extremely foolish argument and your attempt to switch this to a meta-discussion on debating styles doesn't change that.
For me, HN is an excuse to write and for me writing is thinking and the sorts of things I like to think about does not include accusing people of ignoring my posts, in part because many of them are worth ignoring [that's the way unedited writing tends to work] and in part because I have found I prefer conversation to flame wars -- and anyway, when I want a flame war, I have most of the rest of the internet upon which to stalk one and the one's I tend to stalk are much more important than vanilla ice cream versus strawberry, Mac versus Linux, AstroTurf versus natural grass, or the appropriateness of designated hitters and instant replay decisions.
Read the post to which I am responding. Was it thoughtful and reasoned and articulate? What did it accomplish? Did it raise anyone's standing in the HN community? Did it make HN better? Was it well written? What view did it advance?
Ok, I'll answer the last one. It advanced a view that I hold a particular view. Which is more convincing as to what views I hold, my original posts or brief assertions about those posts? And which is more interesting?
If despite the list of persons doing so being rather long, should finding disagreement with me constitutes an accomplishment, congratulations. Though as I've said, for me writing is thinking. Thus, I am also on the list.
Here's a suggestion for you: stop assuming that your lofty air of wisdom is all that's required for people to accept your pronouncements without question. I'm sure it impresses the kids, but I've been around a little longer.
All you've done is claim that Windows without support is cheaper than Linux with support. It's an extremely foolish argument and your attempt to switch this to a meta-discussion on debating styles doesn't change that.