The article clearly has substance, it just doesn't align with your opinion on the topic. dang definitely didn't "single out" the commenter, which a cursory glance at dang's comment history will corroborate - hell if you go back far enough he's told me the exact same thing.

If jheriko had phrased their comment more constructively, there would likely be no issue.

If you think I'm singling anyone out, take a look at https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=dang. I'm posting these all the time, unfortunately. (Edit: I see that Zikes already pointed this out.)

I wouldn't say the article was particularly substantive, but by HN's standards the comment wasn't fine. It was (a) fluff, (b) generic, (c) ideological, (d) inflammatory, and (e) by an account that has done this before.