But in that case ... they weren't wrong about you, were they?

There are plenty of people who would be correct in concluding that I would bear them hostility if I knew what they were like.

They would be incorrect to conclude that the priors I assign to that type of person among LW is very high, and incorrect to assume that my asserting that someone is wrong indicates I have concluded the person is that type of person, so that my comment indicates hostile intent.

Perhaps I've given you an incorrect impression.

If you really want to get your ideas across

While I have proselytizing tendencies, that's not my fundamental goal, particularly in a forum disagreement. Given my limited resources of me, my proselytizing attitude is to sing to those with the ears to hear. People who are assuming that I am hostile are not the low hanging fruit in that regard.

But people who assume I am hostile can be perfectly fine partners in a disagreement. In a disagreement, I am primarily hoping to change my own mind, whether in correcting an error, or clarifying hazy positions of my own. They might even be better, in that they won't cut me slack when I am sloppy. People who dislike you can be perfectly useful in a discussion. The enemy of my enemy (our ignorance) is my friend.

But I find it strange that you think I should find it hopelessly futile to try to change a person's assumptions about my intent, but a productive use of my time to try to change their minds about some other fact of reality.