It's easy to see both sides of the argument I think. fd was posting about Pastie's gloomy posts, and let's face it, they were gloomy - the discussion was about whether or not the gloom was justified by the state of the country or not. Pastie on the other hand hinted at a more personal reason for any possible gloominess, and fd didn't pick up on it, which of course to someone dealing with something traumatic could be seen as hugely insensitive.
However, as I said very soon after the argument started, we can't all be expected to check that people are okay before we argue with them. I had this very argument a few months ago, when I was accused of being insensitive because of the way I responded to someone else's post. I made no apologies for it at the time and make none now - I argue with posts, not with posters. The poster behind the post is something completely different, and clearly if they were to discuss their personal problems with me, my tone would be completely different compared to if they wanted to discuss our opposing views on politics.
I doubt he'll mind me saying this - I PMed fd with a link to the thread from the old board which showed someone else doing roughly what fd did to Pastie, to me. I could have absolutely pounced on their post and made the other person (who there's no point in me naming) feel absolutely awful, but instead I said no worries, and focused on the actual discusison in hand. I'm not suggesting that my way was the "right way", I'm simply pointing out when someone is offended, that requires two people - the offender and the offendee. The same principle holds true of the WeeMann/fd argument. fd didn't have to be offended by WeeMann's post. Equally, WeeMann didn't have to be offended by fd's initial one. Sometimes we take offence due to an immediate, uncontrollable, visceral response to something absolutely disgusting that we experience. Far more often, we choose to take offence for any number of reasons - it might be a good way to show our position on an issue, it might make a good point, it might scare someone into backing down, or it might simply be that we don't like the other person. I don't know what it was on any of these recent occasions, but I doubt it was the first option in any of them.