I think it is clear to the comment readers that I have not met the author in person and that I wasn't passing a judgement on his whole person, merely extrapolating from the impression of the article.
I, for one, think that is pretty clear from the fact that I don't call the author by their first name. I did not write "Ken you're a smartass." Also, I did not write on his LinkedIn profile, I commented on a specific article.
In any case, it is but one of many comments and by up-/down voting, the community can send a signal to the author (if he reads here) as to whether he appears to be a smartass in this article. I think that is helpful.
Those nuances may have some substance but they are drowned out by the snarky putdown.
I hear you that your intent was good! but that, alas, is not enough; a comment like that snaps to an ugly internet grid even though you didn't mean it to.
I don't think it's safe to assume that readers would understand that you weren't passing a judgment on the author. You called him a smartass.
I agree that, not having met Ken, you couldn't know how inaccurate and unfair that was, but you shouldn't have posted it in the first place. It's clearly against HN's guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
I, for one, think that is pretty clear from the fact that I don't call the author by their first name. I did not write "Ken you're a smartass." Also, I did not write on his LinkedIn profile, I commented on a specific article.
In any case, it is but one of many comments and by up-/down voting, the community can send a signal to the author (if he reads here) as to whether he appears to be a smartass in this article. I think that is helpful.