I think it&#x27;s pretty unfair to categorize the prior comment as &quot;pro-military stumping&quot;. It read to me like the commenter was providing some possibly alternative information from a different field that might provide interesting insights others could use. There was no strong pro-military tone that I can see after a couple re-readings. Moreover, the items the commenter laid out weren&#x27;t inherently the opposite of what you provided as an excerpt. The original comment doesn&#x27;t say anything about equality in distribution of conversational turn-taking, or intuiting how others felt. I mean, item #2 is advocating the benefit of constant communication among the team ... so it actually sounds like it could complement the article&#x27;s findings.