Personally, when responding to other people's posts and questions, I see no need to "affirm" other people, or to be politically correct, or to worry if my responses might hurt their feelings (or worry if my responses might hurt some other WhiteBlaze member's feelings). In many of the fields (that I have worked in) direct or blunt responses are not considered rude. Such answers are actually valued and appreciated. If some people find such bluntness to be "rude"--so be it. Different strokes for different folks.
If someone asks: "Will I be O.K. if start from Springer in early March with a 40 degree sleeping bag?" And, if I think that they would be a "dang fool" to start with a 40 degree bag, I am going to say: "I think you would be a dang fool to use just a 40 degree sleeping bag starting from Springer in early March". Why should I sugar coat my response? Why should I be concerned that the original poster (or someone else) might have their feelings hurt by my response? In this hypothetical example, the original poster asked for our individual and/or collective opinion(s) regard using a 40 degree sleeping bag in early March. If it is indeed my (or anyone else's) opinion that the person would be "a dang fool" to use a 40 degree bag i early March, why should I (or anyone else) hesitate to express that opinion? It is indeed my opinion--and that is what the OP asked for.
Personally, if I am the one who is asking if I should use a 40 degree bag in early March--I really WANT to know if you think that I would be a "dang fool" to do so. I don't want you to give me some sugar-coated, watered down, politically correct response. Frankly, my health, safety and overall comfort would possibly be at risk if I used a 40 degree bag in early March. Thus, why should you worry about hurting my feelings? In such a scenario, I NEED you to be blunt and I need you get my attention. You will have not helped me if you worried about hurting my feelings.
Many years ago, my young (autistic) son was running toward the street in front of our house. Cars were coming down the street. I ran even faster than my son, and gently "tackled" him just before he walked in front of a speeding car. Yes, I scared him. Yes, I hurt his feelings and even made him cry. Yes, by tackling him, I stopped him from doing what he really wanted to do. I kept him from achieving his goal. Yes, he was not able to "Hike His Own Hike" (into the direct path of oncoming cars). I ask you: What was more important--attempting to preserve my son's health, comfort and safety---or preserving his feelings and his desire to Hike His Own Hike? Should I have reasoned with him, affirmed him and been concerned about his feelings---or should I have tackled him before the car struck him?
It is my opinion, if someone poses a question on WhiteBlaze, we OWE them our honest, direct, non-sugar-coated response. We do not help them if we do otherwise.