I'm afraid this comment is breaking the same guideline. Dismiss as much as you like, but please don't post like this to HN. It's informationless and therefore boring and therefore off topic here.
If it's about information content- I was concerned that people reading this article may not be aware that Gurjieff was a New Age guru. The article is written to present him as some kind of respectable philosopher who attracted a following of intellectuals and artists, rather than a cult leader. I felt it was important to point out what he actually was.
I still don't quite get why my comment broke that guideline. What would be a non-shallow dismissal of Gurjieff? I mean, give me an example here, because I'm a bit confused, really. The man had no "work" to dismiss, he was just full of hot air and making it up as he went along. What else can be said about him than the fact that he was a charlatan?
What, at the end of the day, is counter to HN guidelines about calling out cranks?
Seems like a weird take given the comment adds information from wikipedia, I hadn't ever heard of the dude, and that was useful information to me in quickly assessing what people were going on about.
Would you leave the same remark under a comment dismissing some flat-earther?