I defer to the site founder on all issues of site governance. I have found HN largely to be a worthwhile website for my 911 days as a registered user, and my interest is mostly to make sure that the site founder and the members of his volunteer editor ("curator") team
http://ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html
continue to enjoy the site and find it useful for themselves. They are doing a good job, and I want them to have incentive to keep up the good work.
When pg wrote his recent post "Ask HN: How to stave off decline of HN?"
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2403696
He wrote, "The problem has several components: comments that are (a) mean and/or (b) dumb that (c) get massively upvoted."
That's still the key issue. Anything that results in lower scores for mean, dumb, or other bad comments is something helpful to all readers of HN.
It looks like you have received an explanation from a couple of other participants about why the comments you asked about, as posted, can look either mean or dumb (or both) even if they are factually correct. That is the art of posting here, to post with correct information, a civil tone, and thoughtful use of language. It's kind of other participants to suggest some ways to improve those posts. Usually people just downvote (or upvote) to indicate their judgment of post quality. It happens that I didn't read that thread originally at all, so I am still digesting the context of the comments you asked about.