Rules are subject to interpretation. If it draws attention to the point then it is perfectly valid. In fact I think it's just here. When your point opposes religious thinking then you have to throw your toys out of the pram.
If I'd posted this from my older account then the response would be different as HN treats older more established users differently.
When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. E.g. "That is an idiotic thing to say; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."
There is no interpretation to be made there. You willfully ignored it.
I didn't think you were new to HN, judging by your comment history, but I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps you've been banned before. Perhaps you feel your new identity gives you a vantage point from which to snipe at others. But either way, would you please clean up your writing?
I think this is the problem:
"There's too much woo and too many chipped shoulders and opportunists these days and they need a smackdown."
You feel you're on a mission, and that your mission supersedes following the rules. It doesn't.
News.YC is, among other things, an experiment to see if this fate can be avoided. The sites's guidelines explicitly ask people not to say things they wouldn't say face to face. If someone starts being rude, other users will step in and tell them to stop.
It sounds like we're going to be stuck with d0 for awhile. If they get banned, I assume they'll create a new account and do this all over again. I'm at least hoping they'll be reasonable.
Rules are subject to interpretation. If it draws attention to the point then it is perfectly valid. In fact I think it's just here. When your point opposes religious thinking then you have to throw your toys out of the pram.
If I'd posted this from my older account then the response would be different as HN treats older more established users differently.