So we are in agreement on the discussion.
To explain people’s hostility, most of them are people that have been around through the various incarnations of this same topic, the very first one they blatantly said they were trolling for attention, it was also the hotbed of several bad takes when they said someone was rude for ignoring someone that told them to uninstall life.
Lots of posts were pretty bad, a lot were deleted because people were reporting them. A secondary problem came up as people were claiming they were being reported because of their name and not the report where the contents of their message.
Another point I was making was that they never really defend their topic, they just deflect and disregard any opposing logic and it was even noted by the customer service rep they appealed to over the public forums that a lot of their responses were completely dismissing the point of discussion to repeat themselves and nauseam.
So what we’re left with, is a thread that can only really end with hostility because of the insincere methods the op uses in the discussion because once people are civil and only talk about the subject, the thread ends. All of the negatives and redundant points have already been lined up and explained to death, the positives more or less haven’t been weighed at all because they haven’t presented any aside from what if scenarios that the opposing arguments already cover better.
This topic is more or less a soap opera now where one of the main characters has been unalived three or four times already but keeps being brought back. People get heated and they get frustrated then the thread gets locked then it gets unlocked and absolutely nothing changes.
Each time they try and play the saint and say not to demonize people for their opinions, people are reminded that people only demonize them because their opinions were particularly bad or harmful. I can be fine with someone having an objectively bad opinion like pineapple on pizza, no I won’t make them out to be an awful person because of that but if someone tries to make a persuasive argument with no substance and just a roundabout rhetoric about how they know better than human history and that it is rude to want to distance yourself from harmful personalities, then sure, someone can totally be an awful person for those opinions.
People implying bad things about you may have only been because the method in which you hopped into the conversation to the defense of someone who did make those horrible statements by poking at people who are already fed up with these reruns. It gets even more absurd when the counterpoints are like saying that account wide features will turn people into Judge Dredd which and it’s absurdity is said to rile people up.