I've found, in general, that tone online is 60% interpretive to the reader. There are many times that someone types something in a positive way, and the responder reads it in a negative way. Indeed, I would posit that such interactions are how most conversations here start.

We're got some passionate, opinionated people on hubski, myself included. However, when interactions seem heated, it's best to assume that the other person isn't yelling at you over the computer, and just because someone is telling you "you're wrong and here's why", it doesn't mean they are judging you actively as a person and finding you lacking.

The above sentiment, I think, is part of the "weird tone" of hubski. Compared to somewhere like reddit, where everyone's an expert and all views pass muster, Hubski has lots of passionate people who can and will peer review your shit. I found it a nice change, but I can see why it can be off-putting. Before I post an opinion here, i usually go "Where do I know that from?" and check my sources.

I treat hubski like a peer-reviewed journal, because I want people to be able to trust what I say.