i really don't see how kimon is as bad as tony. at worst he's about as flippant as anyone else when they don't feel like trying and other than that he makes decently-constructed arguments all without slinging stuff and insults as an argumentative supplement. the only explanation i can think of is that it's popular to stuff on him since he's historically been difficult to argue with.
and i guess the only reason matthew is bad is because a lot of the time his arguments aren't very well thought out. i would take either of them any day over the people that tend to be excessively hostile and say literally all the things you should never say to a real person. sometimes it's fun to read posts as though they were being said directly to someone face-to-face and it's a hilarious caricature of reality
