I see the 'ski as (amongst other things) a place to share emotions and opinions with a welcoming community, which sometimes gives rise to my sharing visceral, perhaps not well-thought-out reactions.

Hubksi is indulged with a plethora of people who have interesting opinions which they can successfully discuss at length. If you become used to that, I guess there's a risk of adverse reactions to comments like the one in discussion.

I understand the intent of the 'NO' as an impassioned disagreement. I also agree that the word count of a comment means very little. And it is of course great that you feel comfortable expressing emotions and opinions here. But emotions should seldom be left to their own devices. The 'NO,' to me, represents your emotions more than your opinions. To some it may seem empty of thought and reflection.

Whether that's true or not is irrelevant. But you must seek to be conscious of these things and how your comment will read to both those that agree and disagree. A potential reason that Q sees it as pandering is because the only person who can concur with it is someone who already agrees with you. There is zero analysis of anything.

Next time you have urge to make a similar comment, or any comment really, take a step back. It is as important to interrogate your own views as it is everyone else's. Both its standpoint and the way it's written. I personally like to imagine that each comment is my first. That each one is my first impression. I try not rely on people remembering who I am, how I feel, or my typical demeanour. Of course, the beauty of Hubski is that you can procure that kind of relationship with people. But on a medium where anyone from across the world could be reading my words at any time, I find it an appropriate approach. Though I'm likely not always successful.