Yes, in fact it would be better without the last sentence. If one wishes to have a productive discussion, assuming bad faith on the part of your interlocutor is not the way to go about it. That just leads to flame wars.
They didn't assume bad faith, misanthropy was also offered as a possibility. Which seems like an appropriate assumption if it's not bad-faith or a cultural misunderstanding.
We've all seen YC companies that send their marketing brigade into threads where their businesses get well-deserved criticism. HN doesn't necessarily punish bad-faith users, your account won't be banned if you "accidentally" fail to disclose your affiliation with a startup or business. They're up against green accounts, entrepreneurial apologists and zombie accounts that last posted in 2015 hacked with Pastebin credentials. If you comment on a controversial thread, half the time a throwaway account will ragebait you with nonsense and then replace their comments with "." after 3 hours to make you look crazy. There are people on this website that are particularly motivated to disrupt particular discussions.
You just can't ever rule out bad faith in these conditions. It's not smart to assume bad faith either, but there are too many conflicts of interest to dismiss the possibility.
