The “atmosphere” is you had a bad idea, he explained to you why, and then you childishly stated “you must be fun at parties”.
I appreciate the irony of you calling for more concise writing, when a good portion of your post was an unnecessary metaphor.
He wasn’t being combative. He explained to you why your ideas were bad. “You must be fun at parties” was the only “combative” thing said in your discussion with him.
There’s a difference between debating against words and attacking an individual. Your initial words were bad ideas, so your words were attacked. Then, you attacked the person.
If you’d like to alter reality by painting fun scenarios of bad food in a restaurant, feel free, but don’t mind us if we don’t get lost in your false perception of what really happened here.