FWIW, the "Guidelines" ask you to please not dismiss work out of hand. Appearances matter, too - you can point out that a tool is proprietary and has lots of plausible FLOSS alternatives without being uncivil about it ("garbage").

Edited: Commenting about the voting, especially in the way you did here, is inappropriate too. We're here for substantive discussion.

I agree with you, but I also think there’s room to point out that Uber has lost credibility and it wouldn’t be surprising or inconsistent if it was just a PR post for recruiting hype. Without details (not mere surface comments) on how it is differentiated from the many other available solutions and deep dives into what use cases it is specifically better suited for, it seems reasonable to treat it with a lot of skepticism.

But to be clear, I totally agree in terms of the degree and tone. I don’t think the parent comment you responded to was “uncivil” in any way, but overly dismissive instead of just noting to be skeptical.

Skepticism is one thing, lack of civility is quite another (and I'm sorry, but calling stuff "garbage" in such an off-hand way is clearly uncivil to me, especially when shallow dismissals are expressly pointed out as a problem). See brylie's comment in this thread for how to do it right - take that, add a stronger caveat about this tool's proprietary status, in contrast to so much other stuff in this space being FLOSS, and it would make your point quite well without degrading discussion.

I didn’t write a comment calling anything garbage. In what way did my comment degrade discussion?

I believe they’re referring to 'Michaelanjello’s comment upthread:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18692801

Well my comment itself was downvoted, so I don’t agree it was a focus on the original comment.