No.. It's not required, because it's anticipated. If you wanted to give you're opinion, I think you could have constructed it in a manner that wasn't so provoking and attacking and you might have actually received a balanced response. It's how discussions work.(not blogs.. sorry for being a pedant but it's how I feel right now).
This is how I see it with this conversation...
Bhaji: You suger coat the issue making it out we should tip toe round and be gentle to Lewis because he's upset from all the media...
Me: I made it blunt, saying it's nothing new in F1 and he's acting like a 5 year old child and needs to stop playing the act and get a grip...
Sorry if you dont like the way I came storming in and having a major different perspective about the silent treatment he gave out today, but ffs the guy got pole and he didn't even crack a smile for his own fans. Hell! I would of clapped in support if he stuck his fingers up at the screen and told us "haters" all to go rot in hell.
It wasn't meant to provoke people, but if people are going to accuse me of being "bitter" and a "hater" and try to devalue my opinion, what do you think was going to happen? That I was going to laugh out loud and change my mind and then inspire people to write Lewis a "get well soon card" and make him feel better?
Sometimes a completely different perspective from yours can be very helpful in finding a middle ground that we can both agree on, that's social constructionism there for you!
But if people are just going to accuse me of being something I'm not then I will refuse to move from my side as well, and just do what Lewis did and play the silent game and not bother with any active participation because the same old personal issues will come flowing back, trying to make me out as some sort of troll waiting to pounch the next time Lewis sneezes by making a few personal pops.