Lord of Hypocrisy

A reasonable statement (except that for those willing to look at full nuance, as it too is technically a sweeping generalization. I.e. often in split second emergency decision situations, sweeping generalizations can be useful. Though often enough they are used badly).

"Maintainers aren't the problem."

An unreasonable statement, curiously in the same comment as a clear statement about why it is unreasonable. I.e. a clear 'sweeping generalization about maintainers'. (not used in a split second emergency decision situation)

Elsewhere in this discussion you said-

"Abuse and threats are _not_ OK. But a person who isn't getting their way that falsely resorts to such accusations is the definition of dysfunction and even cancer. It is like a woman evoking "I feel threatened" when she has absolutely no reason to be. She knows it'll get people to back off even when she is what is wrong. Those instances must be called out and rejected. But they aren't, because the person went nuclear and nobody wants to touch it. And because that person already established themselves as erratic and misguided and largely beyond consoling or help."

While this sentiment has logic, and in fact had a scene in the recent Whoopie Goldberg / Charlie Sheen film '9/11', the nuance that I would highlight is that the "instances must be called out and rejected" must be taken in logical proportion with the instances when similar situations occurred but there absolutely were reasons for the person to feel threatened. Those instances must also be called out and rejected. I think people here, myself included, take offense to your attitude because it doesn't do justice to that other side of the balance. That balance is what seems to be missing from your attitude on the matter. As evidenced by the first two quotes I highlighted of yours that are clearly contradictory and therefore hypocritical.

Also, your characterization that "she is what is wrong" is another suspicious trigger you used. Having recently watched '9/11'(the breakfast-club/sartre-esque 2017 movie), one can envision the dynamic that "it is society, and the history of gender-based systematic injustice that is the root of the problem, not the person who manifests some amount of non-logic as a result of that millenia long human history of injustice". Likewise, a nuanced view would suggest that the context matters a lot as to how people should be called out as wrong. In an elevator in the world trade center on 2001/09/11, a certain greater amount of tact and delicacy is appropriate for calling someone out as wrong, as opposed to on alt.politics on usenet or a twitter or facebook or lwn comment thread.