> It sounds like you are afflicted with the same affliction as your dad, just in the opposite direction (especially if you actually cried over typing this post).

I don't think it's exactly completely delusional or obsessive to be sad that your dad is now financially unstable and obsessive about a single thing to the point it's alienated the people around them.

You can be well adjusted and sad that someone close to you is on a bad path.

You can even resent people you blame for enabling that path.

Let’s not diagnose people based on a few sentences.

I am not diagnosing anybody with anything, I am merely commenting what I am seeing.

> It sounds like you are afflicted with the same affliction as your dad

Are you going to tell me with a straight face you didn't tell them there was something wrong with them ("diagnose them")?

Was what he was describing a disease? Because I don't believe in diagnosing diseases based on a few sentences.

You literally described it as an affliction. If you prefer the criticism to be, "don't pathologize someone based on a few sentences," fine, don't pathologize someone based on a few sentences.

If your stated belief is real, then I'd encourage you to reflect on why you were willing to violate this principle, and why, after being challenged on it, you deflected.

I'm sorry, English is not my first language, but I don't think "affliction" means "disease". I used it as a "cause of persistent pain or distress", which I still think the OP has, given that he/she admitted to crying while writing a blog post (you can read his/her other posts to see that it's a bit of an obsession with Musk).

Well I'm sorry, I didn't realize English isn't your first language, but I should have been cognizant of this possibility. (In my language community, it's more commonly used to mean "a cause of mental or bodily pain, as sickness, loss, calamity, or persecution." I think even this is broader than I generally hear it, it's rare that I don't hear affliction refer to a disease.) You also said they were "hysterical", which, unless you're using a quite different usage, generally refers to someone's mental health & their inability to manage their emotions; not something we should say about someone because they took the risk to share a painful experience in public.

TIt is common to dismiss someone discussing something they care about, on the grounds that they care about it; they created this account to talk about Musk, so we shouldn't be surprised that's what they're doing. They related something painful, so we shouldn't be surprised it upset them. None of this should be held against them or discredit them.

If you were in there shoes, and assuming everything they said was true - is there really a different way that you would have expressed it?